2018 (7) TMI 665 - HC - GST

Extension of time for filing GST Tran-1 - case of petitioner is that despite making several efforts on the last date for filing of the application, the electronic system of the respondent no.2 did not respond - Held that - The respondents are directed to reopen the portal within two weeks from today. In the event they do not do so, they will entertain the GST TRAN-1 of the petitioner manually and pass orders on it after due verification of the credits as claimed by the petitioner - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
- Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus to extend time for filing GST Tran-1.
- Allegation of electronic system failure by respondent no.2 on the last filing date.
- Direction to reopen portal or entertain manual filing if portal not reopened.
- Respondents to verify credits and allow tax payment through regular system.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the GST council respondent no.2 to extend the time period for filing GST Tran-1 for the petitioner. The petitioner claimed that on the last filing date, the electronic system of respondent no.2 failed to respond despite multiple attempts, potentially causing a loss of entitled credit. The court, in response to the petition, directed the respondents to either reopen the portal within two weeks or entertain the manual filing of GST TRAN-1 by the petitioner. Moreover, the court ordered that the respondents verify the credits claimed by the petitioner and ensure that the petitioner can pay taxes through the regular electronic system, facilitating the use of the credit likely to be considered for the petitioner.

The judgment emphasizes the importance of ensuring that technical failures do not impede the rights of taxpayers to claim legitimate credits. By instructing the respondents to either rectify the portal issue promptly or allow manual filing, the court aims to safeguard the petitioner's entitlement to the claimed credit. Additionally, the directive for verification of credits and facilitation of tax payments through the regular system underscores the court's commitment to upholding the principles of fairness and efficiency in the implementation of tax laws.

Furthermore, the court granted the respondents a month to file a counter affidavit and scheduled the matter for further hearing on a specified date, demonstrating a procedural adherence to allow all parties to present their arguments comprehensively. This approach ensures a balanced consideration of the issues raised in the petition and reflects the court's commitment to a thorough and fair adjudication process. Overall, the judgment showcases a judicial stance focused on addressing technical glitches in tax filing systems to uphold the rights of taxpayers and maintain the integrity of the tax credit process.