2021 (3) TMI 951 - HC - GST

Transitional credit - Seeking direction to respondents to make arrangements for reflecting their electronic credit ledger relating to the petitioner - HELD THAT - It is not in dispute that on coming into force of GST regime, the CENVAT regime came to an end. It also cannot be disputed that assessee registered as dealer under the CENVAT resume can claim credit in the GST resume. It is but required for the respondent to make available necessary provision resulted on the website of the portal of the respondent to enable the petitioner to claim such credit. Merely because there was a glitch in the website and or that the website is not working properly, a registered dealer cannot be denied the benefit of credit available under the provisions of Act. More particularly Section 140 of the Act. The respondents are directed to make necessary arrangement by updating the data available with the respondent as regards the electronic credit ledger of the petitioner and reflect the correct amount so as to enable the petitioner to claim said credit - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Claim for mandamus to reflect electronic credit ledger in GST regime.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, sought a mandamus directing the respondents to update their electronic credit ledger reflecting the CENVAT Credit as shown in the TRAN-1 form. The petitioner transitioned from the KVAT Act to the CGST regime and was entitled to carry forward Central Credit under the CENVAT Regime by claiming electronic credit through form TRAN-1. However, on attempting to upload the form, the petitioner's credit ledger was not displayed on the respondent's website, showing a zero balance despite being eligible for a significant amount. The petitioner raised grievances and complaints with various tax authorities but received no response. The court acknowledged the petitioner's entitlement to claim the credit under Section 140 of the Act and directed the respondents to update the data on their website to enable the petitioner to claim the credit. If electronic updating was not feasible, the respondents were instructed to accept a physical hard copy from the petitioner for consideration within eight weeks. The petitioner was also permitted to submit a certified copy of the order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with these directions.