9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 267 - HC - GSTFiling of Form TRAN-1 - transitional unavailed CENVAT Credit - HELD THAT - As a similar view has been taken by all other High Courts, the petitioner is permitted to file or revise their already filed incorrect statutory form TRAN-1 either electronically or manually within a period of 45 days from today - The respondents shall be at liberty to verify the genuineness of the claim of the petitioner. However, the petitioner shall not be denied of their legitimate claim of CENVAT/ITC on the ground of non filing of TRAN-1 by 27/12/2017. Petition allowed.
Issues: Disallowance of CENVAT credit on Input services, Inputs, and Capital Goods; Failure to file Form GST Tran-1 electronically; Comparison with judgments from other High Courts; Dismissal of SLP by the Supreme Court; Permission to file or revise Form TRAN-1; Prayer against cancellation of GST registration.
Disallowed CENVAT Credit: The petitioner challenged the disallowance of legitimate un-availed CENVAT credit on Input services, Inputs, and Capital Goods by the respondent based on a technical error, preventing the petitioner from claiming transitional credit under the GST Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that the failure to file/upload a declaration electronically in Form GST Tran-1 was due to a technical/system error, similar to cases where other High Courts allowed such claims. The High Court referred to judgments from Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, Gujarat, and Karnataka High Courts supporting the petitioner's contention and directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to submit Form TRAN-1 electronically or manually within a specified timeframe. Comparison with Other High Court Judgments: The High Court cited the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in a similar case where the court directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to submit Form TRAN-1 electronically or manually, emphasizing the importance of following such precedents. The High Court agreed with the findings of other High Courts and dismissed the contrary view presented by the Revenue, highlighting the significance of Rule 117 Sub Rule (1A) added to the law. The Supreme Court also dismissed the Special Leave Petition related to the matter, further reinforcing the validity of the High Court's decision. Permission to File or Revise Form TRAN-1: In line with the judgments from various High Courts and the Supreme Court's decision, the High Court permitted the petitioner to file or revise the incorrect Form TRAN-1 within a specified period, ensuring that the petitioner's legitimate claim for CENVAT/ITC would not be denied based on the non-filing of Form TRAN-1 by a specific date. Prayer Against Cancellation of GST Registration: The petitioner also sought relief against the cancellation of GST registration due to the disallowance of unclaimed availed CENVAT credit on capital goods. The High Court allowed the writ petition, restraining the respondents from canceling the GST registration and directing them to take appropriate action in accordance with the law after allowing the petitioner to rectify the technical glitch in uploading information on the GST Board. In conclusion, the High Court's judgment in this case allowed the petitioner to claim legitimate CENVAT credit, permitted the filing or revision of Form TRAN-1, and prevented the cancellation of GST registration, aligning with similar decisions from other High Courts and the Supreme Court's dismissal of the Special Leave Petition.
|
