9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (6) TMI 600 - HC - GSTTransitional credit - Ultra vires provisions - Rules 117 and 120A of CGST Rules - petitioner states that the petitioner could not carry forward this credit for reasons beyond its control due to glitches in the system of the respondents - Held that - Notices issued - To wait for the decision of Apex court in 2020 (6) TMI 517 - SC ORDER.
Issues:
1. Petition seeking direction to carry forward eligible credit in electronic credit ledger. 2. Challenge to the vires of Rules 117 and 120A of CGST Rules, 2017. 3. Reference to previous judgment for support. Analysis: The High Court of Delhi heard a petition seeking a directive for allowing the petitioner to carry forward eligible credit in its electronic credit ledger, specifically an amount of ?6,85,863 being excise duty paid by the petitioner and available in its books as of 30th June, 2017. The petitioner claimed inability to carry forward the credit due to system glitches of the respondents beyond its control. The counsel for the petitioner argued that Rules 117 and 120A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 were ultra vires Sections 140 and 174 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. In support of this contention, reference was made to a previous judgment of the Court in Brand Equity Treaties Ltd. & Ors. vs. Union of India, [2020] 5 TMI 171 (Delhi). The Court issued notice to the respondents, with their counsels accepting the notice on behalf of their respective clients. The Court directed the filing of counter-affidavits within four weeks and allowed for rejoinder-affidavits to be filed within four weeks thereafter. Notably, the Court decided to await the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Brand Equity Treaties Limited & Ors., SLP (C) 7425-7428/2020, and scheduled the next hearing for 16th September, 2020, as per the SC Order of 2020 (6) TMI 517. The Court ordered the immediate uploading of the order on the website and also instructed the forwarding of a copy of the order to the counsels via email.
|
