2020 (2) TMI 1675 - HC - GST

Court Upholds Order on 'FORM GST TRAN-1' Upload Assistance

The court dismissed the writ appeals challenging an interim order directing respondent officers to assist in uploading 'FORM GST TRAN-1' in compliance ... Uploading FORM GST TRAN-1 - HELD THAT:- We take note of the fact that, challenge in these appeals are against an interim order. The said order does not contain any specific directions. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents in the writ petition was only directed to get instruction with respect to the alleged non-compliance of the directions contained in the earlier judgments. It is well within liberty of the appellants herein to point out the above mentioned aspects before the learned Single Judge and to seek appropriate modification of the interim order, if found necessary. We do not find anything to presume that, the learned Single Judge will not consider such submissions, if made with supporting materials. The above writ appeals are hereby dismissed by reserving liberty to the appellants to raise all the contentions raised herein before the learned Single Judge, in seeking modification of the impugned interim order, if found necessary. Issues:Challenges to a common interim order passed by the Single Judge regarding the uploading of 'FORM GST TRAN-1' in compliance with earlier judgments.Analysis:The appeals challenge an interim order directing respondent officers to facilitate writ petitioners in uploading 'FORM GST TRAN-1', based on previous judgments. Appellants argue that the earlier judgments only permitted approaching the Nodal Officer for consideration within two weeks. They claim that applications were already verified, and relief was denied due to failure to upload the form within the stipulated time. Appellants contend that factual differences exist between previous cases and the present situation, making the direction in the impugned order legally unsustainable.The court notes that the appeals challenge an interim order without specific directions. Respondents were directed to address alleged non-compliance with earlier judgments. The appellants have the liberty to present these aspects before the Single Judge for modification of the order if needed. The court believes the Single Judge will consider such submissions with supporting evidence. Any decision will depend on the responses of the respondents. Thus, the court finds no justification to interfere with the impugned order and dismisses the writ appeals while allowing appellants to raise their contentions before the Single Judge for possible modification of the interim order.