9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 667 - HC - GSTNon-filing of TRAN-1 Form - petitioner either could not file TRAN-1 Form because of the technical glitches and/or the request for amendment/revision/modification of TRAN- 1 Form was not allowed - HELD THAT - The Division Bench of this Court had directed the jurisdictional assessing authority to consider all the issues that would be raised by the Petitioners including the issue on merits simultaneously. The Authority was also directed to decide the effect of the judgments of this Court in the case of Heritage Lifestyles and Developers and Pvt. Ltd. 2020 (11) TMI 235 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT where it was held that human errors can be allowed to be corrected and if because of technical glitches, TRAN-1 Form could not be filed, opportunity can be given to file the same , and also Nelco Ltd. 2020 (3) TMI 1087 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT where it was held that after the time stipulated is over, the Petitioners do not have right to file TRAN-1 Form and or seek amendment/revision/modification of the said Form. If in case, the show cause notices are issued while adjudicating the same, the directions and observations in the present order shall also be considered by the Authority - the Petitioners are allowed to file and correct TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 Form. In case it is not possible to file the same online, it shall be filed manually. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Petitioners unable to file TRAN-1 Form due to technical glitches or denied amendment/revision/modification. Analysis: The petitioners in various matters were unable to file the TRAN-1 Form due to technical glitches or were not allowed to make amendments. The petitioners argued, citing the Heritage Lifestyles Developers Pvt. Ltd. case judgment, that human errors should be allowed to be corrected, and if technical glitches prevented the filing of the form, an opportunity should be given to file it. The Department, represented by Mr. Jately and other advocates, contended that the period prescribed under Section 117 of the CGST Act is mandatory. They relied on the NELCO Ltd. case judgment, stating that after the stipulated time is over, petitioners do not have the right to file or seek amendments to the TRAN-1 Form. The petitioners also referred to a recent judgment by the Division Bench at Aurangabad, where it was noted that the challenge to the vires of section 140 and Rule 117 was negated. The Division Bench in Aurangabad allowed a petitioner to correct Form TRAN-1 and file Form TRAN-2, emphasizing the importance of justice in such matters. The Division Bench directed the jurisdictional assessing authority to consider all issues raised by the petitioners, including those on merits. The authority was instructed to decide the impact of previous judgments, such as in the cases of Heritage Lifestyles Developers Pvt. Ltd. and Nelco Ltd., relied upon by the parties. Consequently, the present Writ Petitions were disposed of in accordance with the order from the Aurangabad case. The petitioners were permitted to file and correct TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 Forms, even manually if necessary, within three weeks. The authority was instructed to issue orders based on the observations in the order, preferably within six weeks. Show cause notices issued during adjudication were also to consider the directions and observations in the present order. In conclusion, the Writ Petitions were disposed of without any costs, providing relief to the petitioners to rectify their forms and have their cases considered by the authority within the specified timelines.
|
