9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (6) TMI 578 - HC - GSTPermission to file form TRAN-I - vires of Rule 117(1A) of Haryana GST Rules, 2017 - transitional credit - HELD THAT - The Petitioner has challenged vires of Rule 117 (1A) of Rules, however we do not think it appropriate to declare it invalid as we are of the considered opinion that Petitioner is entitled to carry forward Cenvat Credit accrued under Central Excise Act, 1944. The Respondents have repeatedly extended date to file TRAN-I where there was technical glitch as per their understanding. Repeated extensions of last date to file TRAN-I in case of technical glitches as understood by Respondent vindicate claim of the Petitioner that denial of unutilized credit to those dealers who are unable to furnish evidence of attempt to upload TRAN-I would amount to violation of Article 14 as well Article 300A of the Constitution of India. The Respondents are directed to permit Petitioner to upload TRAN-I on or before 30.06.2020 and in case Respondent fails to do so, the Petitioner would be at liberty to avail ITC in question in GSTR-3B of July 2020.
Issues:
Challenge to vires of Rule 117(1A) of Haryana GST Rules, 2017 and seeking direction to upload form TRAN-I for credit of excess VAT due to technical glitches. Analysis: 1. The petitioner, a proprietary concern in the business of processing cotton seed, challenged the vires of Rule 117(1A) of Haryana GST Rules, 2017, seeking to electronically upload form TRAN-I for claiming credit of excess VAT. The petitioner, registered under the CGST Act, failed to upload TRAN-I by the due date of 31.12.2017. The Respondents extended the filing date to 31.03.2020 due to technical difficulties, as per Rule 117(1A). 2. The issue raised by the Petitioner was compared to the judgment in Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India. The Delhi High Court in Brand Equity Treaties Ltd. vs. Union of India allowed filing of TRAN-I till 30.06.2020 for similarly situated taxpayers. The Court emphasized the need for fair treatment of taxpayers and criticized the narrow interpretation of 'technical difficulties' by the government. 3. The Court noted previous judgments where the Respondents were directed to open the portal for uploading TRAN-I or allow credit in GSTR-3B. The Court highlighted the importance of protecting taxpayers' rights to avail CENVAT credit and criticized the restrictive interpretation of technical difficulties under Rule 117(1A) as arbitrary and discriminatory. 4. The Court refrained from declaring Rule 117(1A) invalid but upheld the Petitioner's right to carry forward Cenvat Credit. The repeated extensions of the filing date due to technical glitches supported the Petitioner's claim of violation of Article 14 and Article 300A of the Constitution. 5. Considering the precedents set by Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and Brand Equity Treaties Ltd., the Court allowed the petition, directing the Respondents to permit uploading of TRAN-I by 30.06.2020. In case of failure, the Petitioner could avail ITC in GSTR-3B of July 2020, subject to verification by the Respondents.
|
