9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titioner's CENVAT account or VAT returns and ascertain whether any such credit was lying un-utilized as on 30.06.2017 and if such credit existed in the CENVAT account or VAT returns of the petitioner, the amount shall be either refunded back by way of credit in the Electronic Cash Register of the petitioner or allowed to be transitioned notwithstanding the fact that the petitioner may have failed to file TRAN-1 in time. - W.P.No.33124 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 3-2-2022 - Honourable Mr.Justice C.Saravanan For the Petitioner : Mr.K.Senguttuvan For the Respondents : Mr.J.Kumaran, AGP(P), for R1 R2, Ms.Hema Muralikrishnan, Sr.Standing Counsel, for R3 to R5 ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the Respondent in Order-In- Original No.07/2020 (Refund) dated 28.05.2020 and quash the same as illegal and further direct the Respondent to permit the petitioner to amend/revise the Form GST TRAN-1 manually or online, by including the omitted amount CENVAT credit of eligible duties or grant refund of said duties. 2. It is noticed that the petitioner was required to file TRA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ST and Central Excise, Assistant Commissioner of GST etc vs. Bharat Electronics Limited, vide order dated 18.11.2021, in W.A.No.2203 of 2021 against the order made in W.P.No.2937 of 2019 [Authored by Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq while sitting along with Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana] has examined a large number of case laws and held as under: 12. Thus, there seems to be a consistent view that if there is substantial compliance, denial of benefit of Input Tax Credit which is a beneficial scheme and framed with the larger public interest of bringing down the cascading effect of multiple taxes ought not to be frustrated on the ground of technicalities. In view of the above, we are inclined to affirm the order of the learned Single Judge in directing the petitioner/respondent to enable the respondent herein to file a revised Form TRAN-1, by opening of the portal and that such exercise is to be completed within a period of 8 weeks from the date of issue this order. 7. In the order dated 06.01.2022 in W.P.Nos.4409 and 4411 of 2020, it has been held as follows: 8. As a matter of fact, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court recently in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der reads as under:- 9.The credit which was earned by a registered dealer or an assessee under the erstwhile Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, Central Excise Act, 1944 and Finance Act, 1994 r/w CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 are indefeasible in nature. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise, Pune and others v Dai Ichi Karkaria Ltd. and others , (1999) 7 SCC 448 , has held that credit availed under the provisions of the erstwhile Central Excise Act, 1944 and Central Excise Rules, 1944 are indefeasible and are intended to reduce the cascading effect of the tax to benefit the consumers. The Court held as follows:- 18. It is clear from these rules, as we read them, that a manufacturer obtains credit for the excise duty paid on raw material to be used by him in the production of an excisable product immediately it makes the requisite declaration and obtains an acknowledgment thereof. It is entitled to use the credit at any time thereafter when making payment of excise duty on the excisable product. There is no provision in the rules which provides for a reversal of the credit by the Excise Authorities except where it has been illegally or irregularly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Sales Tax v. Auriya Chambers of Commerce , AIR 1956 SC 1556 and State of Gujarat v. Ramprakash P Puri , (1969) 3 SCC 156 . Substantial benefit of such un-utilised credit cannot be denied as these credits were earned legitimately under the Tax Enactments which were in force prior to 01.07.2017. 13.My views are fortified by a Division Bench of this Court. While dealing with somewhat similar situation, in the case of Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Assistant Commissioner of GST etc vs. Bharat Electronics Limited vide order dated 18 November 2021 in W.A.No.2203 of 2021 against the order made in W.P.No.2937 of 2019 [Authored by Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq while sitting along with Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana], the Hon'ble Division Bench examined a large number of case laws and held as under:- 12.Thus, there seems to be a consistent view that if there is substantial compliance, denial of benefit of Input Tax Credit which is a beneficial scheme and framed with the larger public interest of bringing down the cascading effect of multiple taxes ought not to be frustrated on the ground of technicalities. In view of the abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
