2020 (3) TMI 408 - HC - GST

Reopening of portal for filing of FORM GST TRAN-1 - Circular No.39/13/2018-GST, dated 03.04.2018 - HELD THAT - The challenge in these appeals are against an interim order. The said order does not contain any specific directions. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents in the writ petition was only directed to get instruction with respect to the alleged non-compliance of the directions contained in the earlier judgments. It is well within liberty of the appellants herein to point out the above mentioned aspects before the learned Single Judge and to seek appropriate modification of the interim order, if found necessary. There is nothing to presume that, the learned Single Judge will not consider such submissions, if made with supporting materials. Of course, contention of the appellants will be subject to what the respondents have to say on the issue, before the Single Judge. The writ appeals are hereby dismissed by reserving liberty to the appellants to raise all the contentions raised herein before the learned Single Judge, in seeking modification of the impugned interim order, if found necessary.

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of earlier judgments regarding the uploading of 'FORM GST TRAN-1' by petitioners within stipulated time frame.

Analysis:
The appeals in question challenge a common interim order issued by a Single Judge, dated 3rd February, 2020. The Single Judge, based on past judgments by the court in similar scenarios, directed respondent officers to assist writ petitioners in uploading 'FORM GST TRAN-1' in line with previous directives. However, the appellants' counsel argued that previous judgments only allowed petitioners to approach the Nodal Officer as per Circular No.39/13/2018-GST, who was then required to review applications within two weeks and take necessary actions. It was claimed that in the present cases, applications had already been verified by the Nodal Officer, reports were sent to GSTN, and the IT Grievance Redressal Committee had denied relief due to petitioners' failure to upload the form within the stipulated time. The appellants contended that the direction in the impugned interim order allowing petitioners to upload 'FORM GST TRAN-1' was legally unsustainable due to factual disparities between past judgments and the current situation.

The High Court noted that the appeals challenged an interim order that did not contain specific directives. The respondents were merely instructed to inquire about alleged non-compliance with past judgments. The appellants were granted the liberty to present the mentioned aspects before the Single Judge and request modifications to the interim order if deemed necessary. The Court emphasized that the Single Judge would consider such submissions with supporting evidence and the respondents' input on the matter. The Court concluded that there was no justification for interfering with the impugned order in the appeals, which were subsequently dismissed, allowing appellants to raise all contentions before the Single Judge for potential modifications to the interim order.