9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 1168 - HC - GSTCENVAT Credit - capital goods - CGST transitional credit not received in electronic credit ledger, inspite of filing TRAN-1 - HELD THAT - Though petition was served and is getting listed since 21 st March 2022, no reply has been filed. Therefore, the averments in paragraph nos.12, 13 and 14 are uncontroverted - to hold petitioner as someone who did not meet the deadline to avail the Cenvat Credit on Capital goods will be too harsh a view to take. Even for a moment if we proceed on the basis that the case did not involve any technical issue as alleged by Respondent No.6 the fact is petitioner filed Form on 26th September 2017. The petitioner is allowed to file required Form by claiming Cenvat Credit and respondent shall within 2 weeks open online portal/provide a link to petitioner for filing the Form - petition disposed off.
Issues:
1. Unavailed cenvat credit on capital goods not received by the Petitioner. 2. Petitioner's attempt to file revised Form GST TRAN-1 delayed due to portal outage. 3. Respondent No.6's statement regarding the absence of technical issues in the case. 4. Petitioner's entitlement to Cenvat Credit and the need for a resolution. Analysis: 1. The Petitioner faced issues with unavailed cenvat credit on capital goods, as highlighted in paragraphs 12, 13, and 14 of the petition. Despite filing Form GST TRAN-1 on the GST portal, the Petitioner did not receive the CGST transitional credit in its electronic credit ledger. The Petitioner sought to rectify the situation by attempting to file a revised TRAN-1 form by the deadline of 27th December 2017, but was unable to do so due to a portal outage. 2. The Court acknowledged the Petitioner's efforts to address the situation and noted that holding the Petitioner accountable for missing the deadline to avail the Cenvat Credit on Capital goods would be overly harsh. The Court emphasized that the Petitioner had initially filed the required form on 26th September 2017, and considering the circumstances, allowed the Petitioner the opportunity to file the necessary form to claim the Cenvat Credit. 3. Respondent No.6's communication stating that the case did not involve any technical issue was noted by the Court. Despite the lack of a response from the respondent to the petition since 21st March 2022, the Court found the averments in paragraphs 12, 13, and 14 to be uncontroversial, indicating a lack of dispute regarding the facts presented by the Petitioner. 4. The Court issued a directive for the resolution of the matter, allowing the Petitioner to file the required form to claim the Cenvat Credit. The respondent was instructed to open the online portal or provide a link to the Petitioner for filing the form within two weeks. If technical constraints prevented online filing, the Petitioner could submit a detailed request physically for consideration. The Court clarified that the decision on the Petitioner's entitlement to the Cenvat Credit would be made by the appropriate authority based on merits, and any further actions against the Petitioner would be taken in accordance with the law. The Court emphasized that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the credit claimed by the Petitioner, leaving it to be determined by the relevant authority. Ultimately, the petition was disposed of with these directions in place.
|
