Court orders extension for GST Tran-1 filing due to system failure, sets deadlines for manual submissions

The court granted the petitioner's request for a writ of mandamus directing the GST council to recommend extending the time for filing GST Tran-1 due to an alleged electronic system failure on the deadline. The respondents were ordered to reopen the portal within two weeks for manual submissions if necessary, verifying claimed credits. A new committee formation notice was acknowledged, granting respondents one month to file a counter affidavit. The respondents were given one month to file a counter affidavit and the matter was listed for further consideration. The court directed the respondents to ensure the petitioner's ability to pay taxes using the regular electronic system.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Petition seeking writ of mandamus to extend time for filing GST Tran-1.
2. Allegation of electronic system failure causing potential loss of entitled credit.
3. Respondents' notice of forming a new committee for individual cases.
4. Prayer for time to file a counter affidavit.
5. Direction to reopen portal and entertain application manually if portal not reopened.

Issue 1: Petition for Extension of Time for Filing GST Tran-1
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the GST council to recommend to the State Government the extension of the time period for filing GST Tran-1 due to his application not being entertained on the last date. The petitioner had filed a complete application for necessary transactional credit, alleging that the electronic system did not respond despite efforts on the deadline, potentially leading to loss of entitled credit.

Issue 2: Allegation of Electronic System Failure
The petitioner claimed that the electronic system failure on the last filing date prevented the submission of the application, which could result in the loss of entitled credit over time. The respondents were directed to reopen the portal within two weeks to allow the petitioner to submit the application manually if the portal remained closed. Orders were to be passed after verifying the credits claimed by the petitioner, ensuring the petitioner's ability to pay taxes using the regular electronic system.

Issue 3: Notice of Forming a New Committee
The respondents informed the court of a new committee likely to be formed to handle individual cases, with a tentative timeline of two weeks for addressing such matters. However, an exact date for the committee's establishment was not provided, leading to the court granting the respondents one month to file a counter affidavit in response to the petition.

Issue 4: Prayer for Time to File Counter Affidavit
Upon the respondents' request, they were granted one month's time to file a counter affidavit in response to the petition seeking the writ of mandamus. The matter was listed for further consideration on a specified date to allow the respondents to present their arguments and responses to the petitioner's claims.

Issue 5: Direction to Reopen Portal and Entertain Application Manually
As a directive, the respondents were ordered to reopen the portal within two weeks from the date of the judgment. Failure to do so would require them to manually entertain the petitioner's application and process it after verifying the claimed credits. Additionally, the respondents were instructed to ensure the petitioner's ability to pay taxes using the regular electronic system designated for credit utilization.

This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive understanding of the issues involved and the court's directives in response to the petitioner's claims regarding the filing of GST Tran-1 and the alleged electronic system failure.

---