Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Techno Kitchenware Pvt. Ltd., sought a direction compelling the jurisdictional GST authority to allow transfer of its accumulated Input Tax Credit (ITC) following relocation/transfer of its business from Haryana to Gujarat. According to the petitioner, due to inadvertence its GST/IGST registration had been transferred from Haryana to Gujarat in a manner that was hindering its ongoing business activities.

The petitioner had made a representation dated 28.12.2022 to the GST Office, Rohtak, seeking resolution of this issue, but had received no response even by the time the writ petition was filed.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to transfer of its accumulated ITC on account of the relocation of its business from Haryana to Gujarat.
  2. What relief was appropriate given that a representation on this exact issue had been pending before the GST authority without any response.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Due to inadvertence, its GST/IGST registration had been transferred from Haryana to Gujarat in a way that hindered its business operations.
  • A representation dated 28.12.2022 seeking resolution and ITC transfer had been pending before the GST Office, Rohtak, without any response for several months.

Respondent's Arguments

  • On notice being issued, the Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents accepted notice on their behalf; no substantive opposition on the merits of the ITC transfer claim is recorded in the order.

Court Order / Findings

  • Noting that the petitioner's representation dated 28.12.2022 was still pending consideration, the Court disposed of the petition by directing the jurisdictional GST Officer (Respondent No. 5) to pass a speaking order on that representation, in accordance with law, within four weeks.
  • The respondents were further directed to send a compliance report to the Court after passing the order.
  • The Court did not itself decide whether the petitioner was entitled to the ITC transfer sought — that substantive question was left to the GST Officer to decide by way of the directed speaking order.

Important Clarification

This order does not settle whether or how ITC can be transferred when a business relocates its GST registration across States — it only compels the department to actually decide the petitioner's pending representation, with reasons, within a fixed time. Businesses facing similar unresponsive representations on ITC transfer can draw on this as an example of the kind of procedural relief courts are willing to grant, but not as authority on the substantive ITC-transfer question itself.

Sections Involved

  • Provisions relating to Input Tax Credit and registration under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (as applicable to inter-State relocation of business/registration)
  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of without a decision on merits — the GST Officer was directed to decide the petitioner's pending representation on ITC transfer within four weeks, with the substantive entitlement left open.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Case No.: CWP No. 17765 of 2023 (O&M)
Neutral Citation: 2023:PHHC:112498-DB
Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri and Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra
Date of Order: 25.08.2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

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.