9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (6) TMI 625 - HC - GSTVires of Rule 117 (4) of the CGST/SGST Rules, 2017 - violation of of Articles 14, 19(1) (g) and 265 of the Constitution of India - principles of natural justice - transitional credit of inputs held in stock - opportunity to file the declaration in CGST TRAN 2 - HELD THAT - Transitory provisions, as the word indicates have to be given its due meaning. Transition from pre-GST Regime to GST Regime has not been smooth and therefore, what was reasonable in ideal circumstances is not in the current situation. In absence of any specific provisions under the Act, we would have to hold that in terms of the residuary provisions of the Limitation Act, the period of three years should be the guiding principle and thus a period of three years from the appointed date would be the maximum period for availing of such credit. The petitioner has attempted to file TRAN within the time limit framed under the Rule. In the context of what has been stated discussed above, this court directs the respondent authorities to reopen the form TRAN II or accept manual filing of GST TRAN II to allow the petitioner to claim transitional credit held in stock as on the appointed date after proper verification including the invoices submitted by the petitioner. It is made hereby clear that such exercise has to be completed within 30.06.2020 so as to enable the petitioner to submit his GST TRAN II. Application disposed off.
Issues:
1. Non-allowance of transitional credit on account of inputs held in stock due to inability to file GST TRAN-2 before the due date. 2. Violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India. 3. Entitlement of the petitioner to file a declaration in CGST TRAN-2 to claim transitional credit. 4. Technical issues faced while filing transitional forms GST TRAN-I and TRAN-II. 5. Request for mandamus to direct the respondents to reopen GST TRAN-II or accept manual filing. Analysis: 1. The writ petitioner raised concerns regarding the non-allowance of transitional credit on inputs held in stock due to the inability to file GST TRAN-2 before the due date as per Rule 117(4) of the CGST/SGST Rules, 2017. The petitioner argued that this non-allowance violated constitutional provisions and principles of natural justice. The petitioner sought an opportunity to file the declaration in CGST TRAN-2 to claim the transitional credit. 2. The petitioner, a registered dealer under the CGST Act, 2017 and the WBGST Act, 2017, contended that the inability to file GST TRAN-2 within the stipulated time was due to technical issues with the utility, leading to the non-filing of the form. The petitioner highlighted the transitional provisions under Section 140(3) of the WBGST Act, 2017, which allowed for transitional credit on goods held in stock as of the appointed date. 3. The court considered previous judgments and observed that technical difficulties had hindered taxpayers from filing statutory forms on time. Referring to decisions from the High Court and specific observations, the court emphasized the importance of transitional provisions and the need for a reasonable timeframe for availing transitional credit. The court directed the respondent authorities to reopen GST TRAN-II or accept manual filing to enable the petitioner to claim the transitional credit. 4. In light of the discussions and legal precedents cited, the court disposed of the writ application, directing the respondent authorities to facilitate the filing of GST TRAN-II by the petitioner for claiming transitional credit on goods held in stock. The court set a deadline for this exercise to be completed, emphasizing the importance of proper verification of invoices submitted by the petitioner within the specified timeframe. 5. The judgment addressed the technical challenges faced by the petitioner in filing transitional forms and underscored the necessity of providing an opportunity to claim transitional credit in accordance with the statutory provisions. The court's decision aimed to uphold the principles of natural justice and ensure that the petitioner could avail the transitional credit within a reasonable timeframe.
|
