2019 (9) TMI 565 - HC - GST

Court orders extension for GST Tran-1 filing to protect credits, mandates fair consideration.

The court granted the writ of mandamus, directing the GST council to extend the filing time for GST Tran-1. It acknowledged the risk of losing entitled ... Extension of time limit for filing of GST Tran-1 - transitional credit - petitioner has alleged in the petition that despite making several efforts, the electronic system of the respondent no.2 did not respond, as a result of which the petitioner is likely to suffer loss of the credit that it is entitled to by passage of time. HELD THAT:- The respondents are directed to reopen the portal within two weeks from today. In the event they do not do so, they will entertain the GST TRAN-1 of the petitioner manually and pass orders on it after due verification of the credits as claimed by the petitioner. List this matter on 14.10.2019. Issues:1. Writ of mandamus sought to direct the GST council to extend the time period for filing GST Tran-1.2. Allegation of non-response by the electronic system of respondent no.2 causing potential loss of entitled credit.3. Grant of benefit limited to CENVAT credit, excluding input tax credit on U.P. VAT.4. Direction for reopening the portal or manual processing of GST TRAN-1 if portal not reopened.5. Provision for payment of taxes using the regular electronic system.Analysis:1. The petitioner requested a writ of mandamus to compel the GST council to recommend extending the filing time for GST Tran-1 due to incomplete processing on the last date. The court acknowledged the petitioner's concern regarding potential loss of entitled credit and directed the respondents to act accordingly.2. The petitioner alleged that despite multiple attempts, the electronic system of respondent no.2 did not respond, leading to a risk of losing the entitled credit over time. The court recognized this claim and ordered the reopening of the portal within two weeks or manual processing of the petitioner's GST TRAN-1 if the portal remains closed.3. Notably, the benefit granted was restricted to CENVAT credit, omitting the input tax credit on U.P. VAT. This discrepancy was highlighted, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive consideration of all eligible credits to avoid any unjust exclusion.4. In response to the petitioner's predicament, the court directed the respondents to reopen the portal promptly. Failure to do so would necessitate manual processing of the GST TRAN-1, ensuring the petitioner's entitlement to the claimed credits after due verification.5. Additionally, the court instructed that the petitioner should be allowed to pay taxes using the regular electronic system, maintaining the process for utilizing the credit relevant to the petitioner's case. The respondents were given a deadline to comply with the directives, and a subsequent hearing was scheduled for further proceedings.