9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (3) TMI 358 - HC - GSTFiling of Form GST TRAN-1 - time-limit for uploading of TRAN-1 - transitional credit - transition to GST regime - HELD THAT - The request of the petitioners before the authorities along with the averments made in the writ petitions to the effect that they faced technical glitches are sufficient - The assessees transitioning into a new procedure set out under the GST regime are bound to face complications and in some cases may be completely unable to carry out the new procedure. The issue involved in these writ petitions has been considered by the Gujarat High Court in Siddharth Enterprises vs. Nodal Officer 2019 (9) TMI 319 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT wherein the question was whether the claim for transition of credit is only a procedural requirement or a mandatory one. Thus, a procedural law should not take away the vested rights of persons that are provided to them by statute. Needless to mention, this vested right is subject to scrutiny by the Department. Therefore, the petitioners should be allowed to upload the TRAN-1/revised TRAN-1 so that their claim of transfer of available credit may be considered by the authorities in accordance with law - the GSTN authorities (Authority that manages the portal) are directed to open the portal for the petitioners till March 31, 2020. This order shall not create any equity in favour of any of the petitioners in so far as their claim is concerned and the same shall be subject to scrutiny by the concerned authority. Petition disposed off.
Issues involved:
Multiple writ petitions seeking permission to file/upload in GST TRAN-1; Extension of time-limit for uploading TRAN-1; Consideration of technical glitches faced by petitioners; Whether transition of credit is procedural or mandatory; Judicial interpretation of Article 300A in relation to property rights; Applicability of judgments from Gujarat, Madras, Delhi, and Punjab & Haryana High Courts; Supreme Court's dismissal of appeal in a related case; Recent judgment by Madras High Court on the flexibility of transition credit timelines; Whether procedural law should override statutory rights; Direction to GSTN authorities to open portal for petitioners. Detailed Analysis: 1. Extension of Time-limit for Uploading TRAN-1: The petitioners sought permission to file/upload in GST TRAN-1, intending to file the form or revised form. While the time limit for uploading TRAN-1 was extended till March 31, 2020, the benefit of this extension was subject to certain conditions under sub-rule 1A of Rule 117. The respondent authorities did not accept the petitioners' request, thereby denying them the benefit of the extended deadline. 2. Technical Glitches and Complications: The petitioners claimed to have faced technical glitches, which the court found to be a valid concern. Acknowledging the challenges faced by assessees transitioning to the new GST regime, the court emphasized that complications could arise, leading to an inability to comply with new procedures. 3. Transition of Credit - Procedural or Mandatory: The court referred to a judgment by the Gujarat High Court, which highlighted the importance of transition credit as a property right protected under Article 300A. The court emphasized that the transition of credit cannot be merely a procedural requirement but a constitutional right, ensuring that property rights are not arbitrarily deprived. 4. Applicability of Precedents and Judicial Interpretations: The court cited judgments from various High Courts, including Gujarat, Madras, Delhi, and Punjab & Haryana, which supported the petitioners' right to file the declaration in Form TRAN-1 for transitioning credit. The dismissal of an appeal by the Supreme Court in a related case further reinforced the validity of such claims. 5. Flexibility in Transition Credit Timelines: A recent judgment by the Madras High Court emphasized the nascent stage of GST implementation, urging a lenient approach towards procedural requirements like availing credit. The court stressed that rigid enforcement of timelines may not be mandatory, especially considering the challenges faced by assessees nationwide in accessing the system. 6. Balance Between Procedural Law and Statutory Rights: The court opined that procedural laws should not infringe upon vested rights granted by statute to individuals. While recognizing the authority's scrutiny over such rights, the court directed the petitioners to upload TRAN-1/revised TRAN-1 for the authorities to consider their credit transfer claims in accordance with the law. 7. Direction to GSTN Authorities: In light of the above considerations, the court directed the GSTN authorities to open the portal for petitioners until March 31, 2020. This order aimed to facilitate the petitioners' claims without creating any undue advantage, subjecting all claims to scrutiny by the relevant authorities. 8. Conclusion: The court disposed of all writ petitions, emphasizing the importance of upholding statutory rights while ensuring compliance with procedural requirements. No costs were awarded, and parties were granted urgent certified copies of the order upon fulfilling necessary formalities.
|
