9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 1088 - HC - GSTCENVAT Credit - carry forward the tax paid on purchase of goods during the VAT regime to the GST regime - migration to GST regime - Sections 139 to 143 of the Act and Rule 117 of the SGST Rules - HELD THAT - Since it is not in dispute that the petitioner herein did attempt to upload the necessary details in the system maintained by the respondents and it cannot be disputed based on a perusal of the system log that the petitioner did attempt to log into the system the mere fact that the petitioner cannot establish that the inability to upload the required details or revise the same was on account of a system error that was occasioned by the respondents cannot be a reason for denying him the substantive benefit of carrying forward the credit earned by him under the erstwhile regime. This writ petition is allowed by quashing the impugned communications and directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to revise his TRAN-1 Forms either electronically or manually on or before 31.12.2019 - petition allowed.
Issues involved:
Transfer of tax credit from VAT regime to GST regime, technical glitch in uploading details on GSTN web portal, denial of transfer of credit by respondent authorities, procedural requirements for transition provisions under CGST/SGST Act and Rules. Analysis: The petitioner, an assessee under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, migrated to the GST regime and sought to carry forward tax paid on goods during the VAT regime to avail credit under the GST regime. The transition provisions governing credit transfer are Sections 139 to 143 of the CGST/SGST Act and Rule 117 of the SGST Rules. The petitioner had to file a declaration in Form GST TRAN-1 by 27.12.2017. However, a technical glitch prevented the petitioner from uploading details on the GSTN web portal. The respondent authorities denied the credit transfer, citing non-compliance with procedural requirements before the cut-off date. The petitioner challenged this denial, arguing that substantial rights under the GST Act should not be deprived due to a technical lapse caused by the respondents. The respondents contended that they could verify attempts made by assessees to log into the system and whether any system errors prevented the upload of necessary details. The system logs indicated that the petitioner attempted to log in before 27.12.2017, falling under category B2. Despite the petitioner's attempt to save details in TRAN-1, the status showed as 'NOT FILED.' The court considered these submissions and noted that the petitioner did try to upload details, and the inability to do so due to a system error should not bar the credit transfer. Referring to judgments from Delhi High Court and Himachal Pradesh High Court, the court emphasized that procedural defects should not deny accrued tax credits. Drawing from these precedents, the court allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned communications and directing the respondents to permit filing of TRAN-1 Forms electronically or manually by 31.12.2019. The respondents were instructed to facilitate electronic filing and verify the genuineness of claims without denying them solely based on the filing date. In conclusion, the court granted relief to the petitioner, emphasizing the importance of not depriving legitimate credit transfers due to procedural issues or technical glitches. The judgment highlighted the need to ensure fairness and facilitate the transition of tax credits from the VAT regime to the GST regime for assessees.
|
