2021 (12) TMI 1226 - HC - GST

Transitional Input Tax Credit - seeking to allow filing of declaration in form GST TRAN-1 and GST TRAN-2 - seeking to reopening the portal - HELD THAT - It appears that a second option has been given by the Calcutta High Court to take care of the problems like the one we are tackling with in the present application. The suggestion of the Calcutta High Court is that instead of directing the portal to be opened, the assessees who are facing such kind of difficulties may be permitted to file individual tax credit in the GSTR-3B Forms for the month of January 2022 to be filed in the month of February, 2022 and the concerned Authority/Assessing Officer would be at liberty to verify the genuineness of such claim. We expect the GSTN and the Nodal Officer to explore such possibility also as suggested by the Calcutta High Court. Some concrete solution is needed so that the directions issued by this Court is meaningfully complied with. The Nodal Officer is once-again present in the Court today. The Nodal Officer has heard the entire order, which has been dictated in his presence. We want the Nodal Officer to look into the second option also and try to find out a viable solution. Post the matters for further hearing on 12.01.2022. We hope and trust that atleast on 12.01.2022 a positive statement is made that the order/directions passed in the main matter has been fully complied.

Summary

Issues: Compliance with court directions regarding filing of GST declarations and transitional credit.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses the compliance issue with court directions from a previous order dated 06th September 2019. The court directed the respondents to permit the writ-applicants to file declarations in form GST TRAN-1 and GST TRAN-2 for claiming transitional credit under Section 140(3) of the Act. The due date under Rule 117 of the CGST Rules for claiming transitional credit was deemed procedural and not mandatory.

2. The original writ-applicants approached the court through Misc. Civil Applications as the respondents failed to implement the court's directions from the earlier judgment. The stance of the Principal Commissioner, Central GST, Ahmedabad South, highlighted that the State GST authorities were responsible for implementing the judgment and were preparing to defend the case.

3. The Nodal Officer emphasized the necessity of GSTN's presence for effective compliance with the court's directions. The Nodal Officer also mentioned that the matter had been challenged in the Supreme Court, with stay orders issued in similar cases pending adjudication. The GSTN clarified its role in technical analysis and stated its lack of authority to allow or decline TRAN-1 filings without proper approval.

4. During the hearing, it was mentioned that the process to comply with the court's directions was in progress, with an assurance that meaningful compliance would be achieved shortly. Reference was made to a recent order by the Calcutta High Court, which provided an alternative solution for assessees facing similar difficulties, suggesting the filing of individual tax credit in GSTR-3B Forms for a specific period.

5. The Calcutta High Court's alternative solution proposed a practical approach to address the compliance issues faced by assessees. The court suggested allowing assessees to file individual tax credit in GSTR-3B Forms for a particular month, with the Assessing Officer verifying the genuineness of the claim. The High Court recommended exploring this option to ensure compliance with the court's directions effectively.

6. The court emphasized the need for a concrete solution to ensure meaningful compliance with its previous directions. The Nodal Officer was instructed to consider the alternative solution proposed by the Calcutta High Court and work towards finding a viable resolution. The matter was scheduled for further hearing, expecting a positive update on compliance by the next hearing date. Copies of the order were to be provided to the concerned parties for communication and action.