2020 (7) TMI 77 - HC - GST

Time Limit for filing of TRAN-1 form - vires of Rule l17 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 - unable to file form due to technical glitches in the portal - HELD THAT - Issue notice - To await the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Brand Equity Treaties Limited Ors., 2020 (6) TMI 517 - SC ORDER .

Summary

Issues:
1. Petition seeking direction to carry forward credit of eligible dues in electronic credit ledger.
2. Declaration sought regarding the legality of Rule l17 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
3. Declaration sought regarding the retrospective amendment in Section 140(1) from 01st July, 2017.

Issue 1: Petition seeking direction to carry forward credit of eligible dues in electronic credit ledger.

The petitioner filed a writ petition requesting direction to allow carrying forward credit of eligible dues in its electronic credit ledger concerning stock available as of 30th June 2017. The petitioner also aimed to challenge the legality of Rule l17 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, and the retrospective amendment in Section 140(1) from 01st July, 2017. The petitioner's counsel highlighted attempts to file the TRAN-1 form within the extended time period but faced technical glitches preventing submission. An Annexure P-1 screenshot from the GST portal dated 27th December 2017 was presented as evidence of the attempted filing.

Issue 2: Declaration sought regarding the legality of Rule l17 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.

The petitioner sought a declaration that Rule l17 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, is ultra vires of Sections 140 and 174 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This challenge was part of the broader petition requesting permission to transfer credit of eligible dues to the electronic credit ledger. The court issued notice to the respondents, and the counsel representing the respondents accepted the notice on behalf of their respective parties. Counter-affidavits were directed to be filed within four weeks, with a provision for a rejoinder-affidavit subsequently.

Issue 3: Declaration sought regarding the retrospective amendment in Section 140(1) from 01st July, 2017.

In addition to challenging Rule l17, the petitioner also sought a declaration that the retrospective amendment made in Section 140(1) from 01st July, 2017, was illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner's argument was supported by the claim that technical glitches on the GST portal hindered the timely filing of the required form, emphasizing the necessity for the court's intervention to rectify the situation. The court ordered the filing of counter-affidavits within the stipulated time frame and scheduled further proceedings to await a judgment from the Supreme Court in a related case, indicating the complexity and significance of the legal issues involved in the matter.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides insights into the legal complexities and arguments presented by the petitioner, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of the issues raised in the petition.