Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s. Paras Krushi Kendra, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking permission to revise Form GST TRAN-1 electronically and to upload the revised form under Rule 120A of the CGST Rules, 2017.

The petitioner submitted that due to technical difficulties on the GST portal on 27.12.2017, it was unable to log in and submit Form GST TRAN-1 for claiming transitional input tax credit. Thereafter, several representations were made before the GST authorities requesting reopening of the portal and permission to file the transitional credit forms, but no effective relief was granted.

Accordingly, the petitioner approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking appropriate directions.

 Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to revise Form GST TRAN-1 and file Form GST TRAN-2 after the prescribed time due to technical glitches on the GST portal.
  2. Whether the authorities were required to examine the petitioner's entitlement to transitional credit under Section 140 of the CGST Act, 2017.
  3. Whether the jurisdictional authority should consider the petitioner's claim on merits after permitting correction of statutory forms.

 Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The petitioner could not upload Form GST TRAN-1 within the prescribed period because of genuine technical difficulties on the GST portal.
  • Several representations were submitted to the GST authorities explaining the portal-related issues.
  • The petitioner requested reopening of the GST portal or permission to submit the revised TRAN forms manually/electronically.
  • Reliance was placed on judicial precedents where similarly situated taxpayers had been granted relief for technical glitches.

 Respondent’s Arguments

  • The respondents appeared through their respective counsel.
  • The authorities submitted that the claim would be governed by the statutory provisions relating to transitional credit and applicable judicial precedents.
  • The respondents opposed automatic grant of transitional credit without examination under the provisions of the CGST Act and Rules.

 Court Order / Findings

The Bombay High Court observed that an identical issue had already been considered in Ambica Fertilizers through Partner vs Union of India & Others, wherein appropriate directions had been issued regarding correction of transitional credit forms.

Following the earlier decision, the Court held that the ends of justice would be served by permitting the petitioner to:

  • Correct Form GST TRAN-1.
  • File Form GST TRAN-2 without prejudice to the rights and contentions of both parties.

The Court further directed:

  • The GST authorities shall examine whether the corrected forms are admissible in accordance with Section 140 of the CGST Act, 2017 and Rule 117(1) of the CGST Rules, 2017.
  • The jurisdictional assessing authority shall also consider all issues raised by the petitioner, including the claim on merits.
  • The authority shall examine the applicability of the judgments in Heritage Lifestyles and Developers Pvt. Ltd. and Nelco Limited.
  • A reasoned decision shall be passed within four weeks.
  • The order shall be communicated within one week.
  • If the petitioner's claim is accepted, consequential relief shall be granted within four weeks.
  • If the decision is adverse, the petitioner shall be at liberty to pursue appropriate legal remedies.

The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

 Important Clarification

Technical glitches in filing GST TRAN forms may justify judicial intervention where taxpayers demonstrate genuine hardship.

  • Permission to revise or file TRAN forms does not automatically entitle the taxpayer to transitional credit.
  • The admissibility of transitional credit must still be examined under Section 140 of the CGST Act and applicable rules.
  • Jurisdictional authorities are required to adjudicate the claim on merits after considering applicable judicial precedents.

Sections / Rules Involved

  • Section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
  • Rule 117(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
  • Rule 120A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India

 Important Case Laws Referred

1. Ambica Fertilizers through Partner vs Union of India & Others

The Bombay High Court relied upon its earlier judgment dealing with similar issues relating to correction and filing of GST TRAN forms affected by technical glitches.

2. Heritage Lifestyles and Developers Pvt. Ltd.

The Court directed the assessing authority to consider the applicability of this judgment while deciding the petitioner's entitlement to transitional credit.

3. Nelco Limited

The assessing authority was also directed to examine the legal principles laid down in this judgment while adjudicating the claim.

Link to Download the Order-https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783921751_4007compressed.pdf

 Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.