9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (7) TMI 548 - HC - GSTFiling of GST TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 returns - rejection on the ground of the petitioner failing to produce any material/evidence to show that he had tried to submit the TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 within the stipulated period, the petitioner faced technical glitch. HELD THAT - This court is of the opinion that the respondent State authorities on the matter being referred to it by the High Court in the earlier round of litigation in WPT No.68 of 2018 should have considered the contentions of the petitioner raised by him in the said writ petition wherein itself he had categorically submitted that he has faced certain technical glitches while submitting TRAN-1 forms and the report in this regard was lodged on 26.12.2017and he has lodged complaint in this regard to the authorities well before the last date - In addition, he has also manually submitted the same on 18.01.2018 and had also sent it by registered post on the same day - All these aspects have not been considered or decided by the Commissioner in his order dated 14.09.2018 in the absence of any reasons and discussion by the Commissioner to the contentions and submissions of the petitioner, this court is of the view that the said order dated 14.09.2018 needs to be reconsidered. Matter remanded back to the Commissioner, Commercial Tax for a reconsideration and for passing of a fresh order - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
1. Unable to upload GST TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 returns on the GST web portal by the last date prescribed. Analysis: The petitioner faced technical glitches preventing the submission of GST TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 returns by the deadline of 27.12.2017. Despite immediate reporting of the issue to the authorities and various attempts to submit the returns manually and by post, permission was refused by the Commissioner on 14.09.2018, citing lack of evidence of timely submission. The petitioner challenged this decision in a writ petition. 2. Refusal of permission to submit TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 returns. The Commissioner's rejection was contested by the petitioner, claiming it was erroneous and perverse, lacking proper verification. Reference was made to judgments from the Madras High Court and Punjab & Haryana High Court where similar circumstances led to granting permission to submit the returns. The High Court noted that the Commissioner's decision seemed incorrect based on the documents provided by the petitioner. 3. Consideration of petitioner's contentions and submissions. The High Court emphasized that the authorities should have considered the petitioner's complaints of technical glitches and efforts to submit the returns before the deadline. Referring to previous judgments, the court opined that the Commissioner's order needed reconsideration due to the failure to address the petitioner's submissions adequately. 4. Remittal of the matter for reconsideration. The High Court remitted the case back to the Commissioner for a fresh decision, directing a thorough reconsideration of the petitioner's claims and documents. The Commissioner was instructed to keep in mind the evidence presented by the petitioner regarding the technical issues faced and the attempts made to submit the returns manually and by post. 5. Empowerment of the GST Council to extend submission dates. Under Section 117(1)A of the GST Law, the GST Council can extend submission deadlines for those facing technical difficulties. The High Court advised the Commissioner to refer the matter to the GST Council if necessary, emphasizing the importance of timely resolution given the petitioner's prompt pursuit of the claim. 6. Timely decision-making and expected timeframes. Considering the time consumed in litigation, the High Court urged the Commissioner to make a decision promptly, ideally within 60 days of receiving the order. If a reference to the GST Council is made, the Council was expected to respond within 90 days of receiving the referral, ensuring a swift resolution to the matter.
|
