Court directs consideration of petitioners' representations, stresses due procedure for fair hearing

The High Court refrained from expressing a view on the merits but directed the third respondent to consider the representations and pass necessary orders in accordance with the law, providing an opportunity for the petitioners to be heard. The Court emphasized the need for due procedure to be followed in considering the petitioners' claim, without expressing a view on the merits of the case. Despite the petitioners' failure to file Form GST Tran-2 within the prescribed deadline, the Court directed the third respondent to consider the representations made by the petitioners, ensuring a fair opportunity for them to present their case before a decision is made.

---

---

Issues:
- Mandamus to credit ITC amount to Electronic Credit Ledger
- Claim of Input Tax Credit under GST
- Failure to file Form GST Tran-2
- Consideration of representations by the respondents
- Access to Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN)

Mandamus to credit ITC amount to Electronic Credit Ledger:
The petitioners, who are retailers of Watches and Leather Accessories, sought mandamus directing the first respondent to credit the Input Tax Credit (ITC) amount to their Electronic Credit Ledger. The petitioners had substantial stock procured before the GST regime and claimed ITC under the transitional provisions. Despite failing to file Form GST Tran-2 within the due date due to complex procedures, they disclosed the details in their monthly returns. The High Court refrained from expressing a view on the merits but directed the third respondent to consider the representations and pass necessary orders in accordance with the law, providing an opportunity for the petitioners to be heard.

Claim of Input Tax Credit under GST:
The petitioners, registered dealers under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, claimed Input Tax Credit under the GST regime for stock procured before the GST implementation. They filed Form GST Tran-1 before the due date but failed to file Form GST Tran-2 within the stipulated time due to procedural complexities. The petitioners argued that they disclosed the details of stock sales in their monthly returns, even though Tran-2 was not filed. The High Court emphasized the need for due procedure to be followed in considering the petitioners' claim, without expressing a view on the merits of the case.

Failure to file Form GST Tran-2:
The petitioners failed to file Form GST Tran-2 within the prescribed deadline of 30.06.2018, as required for claiming Input Tax Credit under the transitional provisions of GST. Despite this lapse, the petitioners maintained that they provided details of stock sales in their monthly returns, demonstrating their entitlement to ITC. The Court directed the third respondent to consider the representations made by the petitioners, ensuring a fair opportunity for the petitioners to present their case before a decision is made.

Consideration of representations by the respondents:
The petitioners made representations to the respondents on 13.11.2018, explaining their situation and requesting the credit of Input Tax under GST. The Court directed the third respondent to consider these representations on their merits, emphasizing the importance of following due procedure and providing an opportunity for the petitioners to be heard before a decision is reached. The respondents were instructed to act expeditiously in processing the representations.

Access to Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN):
The Court highlighted the need for access to the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) for the proper consideration of the petitioners' claims. The respondents were directed to follow the necessary procedures and, if the Nodal Officer finds a prima facie case in favor of the Assessees, access to the GSTN should be provided. The Court underscored the importance of adherence to due process and the law in handling such matters, ensuring a fair and transparent resolution for all parties involved.

---