2020 (1) TMI 27 - HC - GST

Filing of Form GST TRAN-2 - transitional credit - transition to GST regime - Section 140(3) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 117(4)(b)(iii) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and Section 172 of CGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - It is evident that the application/representation submitted by the petitioner before the Nodal Officer/respondent No.1 has remained unconsidered - the Nodal Officer is obligated to consider the application/representation seeking permission to upload GST TRAN-2 Form electronically or manually. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
- Direction to open GST Common Portal for Form GST TRAN-2 submission
- Acceptance of manually filed Form GST TRAN-2 for transit credit
- Consideration of application/representation by Nodal Officer
- Compliance with CGST Act provisions for transit credit

Direction to open GST Common Portal for Form GST TRAN-2 submission:
The petitioner, a Private Limited Company engaged in wholesale trade, sought a direction to open the GST Common Portal for submitting Form GST TRAN-2 to avail transit credit under Section 140(3) of the CGST Act. Despite electronically filing GST TRAN-1, the petitioner failed to file GST TRAN-2 within the due date due to the departure of the company's Accountant. Efforts to avail transitional credit through manual submission were unsuccessful as the Common Portal remained closed. The Court, citing previous decisions, directed the Nodal Officer to consider the petitioner's application/representation for uploading GST TRAN-2 electronically or manually.

Acceptance of manually filed Form GST TRAN-2 for transit credit:
The petitioner's manual submission of GST TRAN-2, after the prescribed filing period lapsed, was not accepted by the respondent Authorities. The Court emphasized the obligation of the Nodal Officer to consider such applications in line with previous rulings. The petitioner's genuine reasons for the delay in filing were acknowledged, leading to the directive for the Nodal Officer to expedite the decision on the application/representation within 8 weeks from the date of the order.

Consideration of application/representation by Nodal Officer:
The Nodal Officer's failure to consider the petitioner's application/representation necessitated the Court's intervention. Referring to relevant sections of the CGST Act, along with Rule 117(1) of the CGST Rules and a Circular dated 03.04.2018, the Court directed the Nodal Officer to review the petitioner's submission promptly. The Court's decision was based on ensuring compliance with statutory provisions and facilitating the petitioner's access to transit credit benefits.

Compliance with CGST Act provisions for transit credit:
In light of Section 140, along with Sections 142 and 172 of the CGST Act, the Court emphasized the importance of adhering to legal requirements for transit credit eligibility. By referencing relevant rules and circulars, the Court underscored the need for timely consideration of the petitioner's application/representation by the Nodal Officer. The judgment aimed to ensure procedural fairness and uphold the petitioner's rights under the CGST Act, ultimately disposing of the writ petition in favor of the petitioner.