9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 434 - HC - GSTCarry forward of amount lying in petitioner s Cenvat account credit when the GST was introduced in the State of Jammu and Kashmir - It appears that the petitioner instead of submitting TRAN-1 form for claiming ITC submitted GSTR-3B - HELD THAT - It is stated that because of the lack of awareness about the procedure to claim the benefit, the petitioner could not submit TRAN-1 within prescribed time but the respondents are denying the same to the petitioner though the petitioner had mentioned about the credit sought to be claimed, in GSTR-3B return submitted by the petitioner within the prescribed period. The respondents have neither disputed that the petitioner is not entitled to carry forward the said credit nor they have disputed the correctness of the amount. Even they have not disputed that the petitioner has not reflected the said credit in GSTR-3B filed within the stipulated time. Only objection that has been raised by the respondents is that TRAN-1 form was required to be submitted within the prescribed period but was not submitted by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage informs that the portal for submitting TRAN-1 is lying closed and it is not possible for the petitioner to submit the claim in TRAN-1. The petitioner cannot be deprived of the benefit of claiming the credit lying in its account on the stipulated date only on the basis of procedural or technical wrangles that one form TRAN-1 was not filled by the petitioner particularly when the petitioner has reflected the said credit in its return GSTR-3B. It is directed that the respondents to permit the petitioner to submit the TRAN-1 either electronically or manually on or before 15.03.2021 and the petitioner shall coordinate with the respondents for the submission of TRAN-1as directed - petition allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Carrying forward of credit in petitioner's Cenvat account to GST regime due to non-filing of TRAN-1 form. Analysis: The petition concerns the carrying forward of an amount of ?9,96,637 from the petitioner's Cenvat account to the GST regime in Jammu and Kashmir. The petitioner failed to submit the required TRAN-1 form and instead submitted GSTR-3B. The Assistance Commissioner informed that the reason for non-filing of TRAN-1 was not due to a technical glitch, leading to the petitioner's case being disregarded. The petitioner's counsel suggested reversing the submission and proceeding with filing TRAN-1 to claim the benefit. Despite lack of awareness about the procedure, the petitioner mentioned the credit in the GSTR-3B within the stipulated time. The respondents did not dispute the entitlement to carry forward the credit or the correctness of the amount but raised objections regarding the non-submission of TRAN-1 within the prescribed period. The petitioner argued that being unaware of the procedure should not deprive them of the benefit, especially when the credit was reflected in the GSTR-3B return. Citing a previous judgment, the petitioner contended that the unutilized credit is a vested right that cannot be denied on procedural or technical grounds. The court agreed with this argument, emphasizing that the introduction of the GST regime allowed for carrying forward unutilized credits, and technical difficulties should not hinder this process. The court directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to submit the TRAN-1 electronically or manually by a specified date, emphasizing the importance of honoring the petitioner's right to claim the credit. The judgment highlighted the importance of not depriving individuals of their rights due to procedural or technical issues, especially in the transition to a new tax regime. The court's decision to permit the petitioner to submit the required form to claim the credit underscores the principle of upholding vested rights, even in the face of administrative challenges. This case serves as a reminder of the need for flexibility and understanding during transitions to new legal frameworks, ensuring that individuals are not unfairly disadvantaged due to technicalities.
|
