2019 (12) TMI 1001 - HC - GST

Reopening of portal for Filing the Form GST TRAN-1 - transition to GST regime - CBIC Circular No.39/13/2018-GST dated 03.04.2018 - HELD THAT - The factual position in the present case is not any different. At this juncture it may be noted that as per Notification No. 49/2019 dated 09.10.2019 issued by CBIC the date prescribed for filing of Form GST TRAN-1 under Rule 117 (1A) of the CGST Rules has been extended to 31.12.2019. This itself demonstrates that the Respondents recognise the fact that the registered persons were not able to upload the Form GST TRAN-1 due to the glitches in the system. It is not fair to expect that each person who may not have been able to upload the Form GST TRAN-1 should have preserved some evidence of it such as by taking a screen shot. From the documents placed on record it emanates that the Respondents have no cogent ground to deny the benefit of the Notification No. 49/2019 dated 09.10.2019 issued specifically to grant relief to taxpayers who faced difficulty in filing Form GST TRAN-1 due to technical glitches. Thereafter when he engaged in communication with the respondent there was no genuine ground forthcoming except for stating that the due date for filing of Form GST TRAN-1 was over. The credit standing in favour of an assessee is property and the assessee could not be deprived of the said property save by authority of law in terms of Article 300 (A) of the Constitution of India. The respondents to either open the online portal so as to enable the petitioner to file the Form TRAN-1 electronically or to accept the same manually on or before 31.12.2019 - petition allowed.

Issues Involved:

1. Request to open the portal or accept the manually filed TRAN-1 form.
2. Challenge to Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, 2017 and Form GST TRAN-1 as ultra vires.
3. Request to restrain respondents from taking coercive measures.
4. Challenge to Section 164 of the CGST Act, 2017 as unconstitutional.
5. Claim for legitimate Input Tax Credit.
6. Quashing of Circular No. 39/13/2018 dated 03.04.2018.
7. Declaration that Rule 117 of GST Rules is ultra vires.
8. Other miscellaneous reliefs.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Request to open the portal or accept the manually filed TRAN-1 form:

The petitioner sought a direction for the respondents to either open the portal to enable the filing of TRAN-1 forms electronically or accept the manually filed TRAN-1 form. The petitioner faced technical difficulties while filing the TRAN-1 form due to low bandwidth and technical glitches, which prevented the submission before the deadline. Despite communicating these issues to the respondents, no resolution was provided. The court acknowledged these difficulties and referred to previous judgments in similar cases, such as M/s Blue Bird Pure Pvt. Ltd vs Union of India, which granted relief by directing the respondents to either open the portal or accept manually filed forms.

2. Challenge to Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, 2017 and Form GST TRAN-1 as ultra vires:

The petitioner argued that Rule 117 and Form GST TRAN-1 were ultra vires to Section 40(5) and Section 164 of the CGST Act, 2017, and violated Articles 14, 265, and 300A of the Constitution of India. The court did not find it necessary to delve into this issue in detail as the primary relief sought was the acceptance of TRAN-1 forms, which was addressed by referring to previous judgments.

3. Request to restrain respondents from taking coercive measures:

The petitioner requested the court to restrain the respondents from taking any coercive measures against them. This request was tied to the primary relief sought regarding the filing of TRAN-1 forms. The court did not specifically address this issue separately but implied that no coercive measures should be taken until the primary relief is resolved.

4. Challenge to Section 164 of the CGST Act, 2017 as unconstitutional:

The petitioner contended that Section 164 of the CGST Act, 2017, suffered from excessive delegation and was unconstitutional. This issue was not pressed further by the petitioner once the court indicated that it would address the primary relief sought.

5. Claim for legitimate Input Tax Credit:

The petitioner claimed entitlement to Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to ?8,23,002/- and argued that they should not be deprived of this credit due to technical issues. The court recognized the petitioner's genuine difficulty in filing TRAN-1 and directed the respondents to either open the portal or accept the manually filed TRAN-1, ensuring the petitioner’s claim for ITC is processed in accordance with the law.

6. Quashing of Circular No. 39/13/2018 dated 03.04.2018:

The petitioner sought to quash Circular No. 39/13/2018 to the extent that it did not include all dealers for filing TRAN-1. The court did not specifically address this issue separately but implied that the relief granted would cover the petitioner's concerns regarding the circular.

7. Declaration that Rule 117 of GST Rules is ultra vires:

The petitioner argued that Rule 117 of the GST Rules, which provided a time limit for filing TRAN-1, was ultra vires and contrary to Section 140 of the GST Act. The court did not specifically rule on this issue but granted relief by directing the respondents to accept the TRAN-1 form, thereby addressing the petitioner's concerns.

8. Other miscellaneous reliefs:

The petitioner sought other miscellaneous reliefs, including dispensing with the service of advance notice and filing certified copies of documents. The court did not specifically address these requests but implied that the primary relief granted would cover the petitioner's concerns.

Conclusion:

The court allowed the petition and directed the respondents to either open the online portal to enable the petitioner to file the Form TRAN-1 electronically or accept the same manually on or before 31.12.2019. The respondents were instructed to process the petitioner’s claim in accordance with the law once the Form GST TRAN-1 is filed. The petition was allowed in these terms.

← Previous Next →