TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court Upholds Decision on GST Credit Extension; Review Application Dismissed</h1> <h3>M/s. Ajay Hardware Industries Pvt. Ltd., Versus Union of India and others</h3> The High Court dismissed the Review Application seeking to overturn a judgment allowing the filing of Form 'TRAN-1' by an extended date. The Court held ... Review of order - Permission to file Form 'TRAN-1' by the extended date - HELD THAT:- Merely, because the implementation has been stayed in Review by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, in our considered opinion, is no ground to review our judgment, however, in our view, the appropriate remedy for the Revenue would be to approach the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing an appeal. Review application dismissed. Issues: Review of judgment allowing filing of Form 'TRAN-1' by extended date based on reliance on judgments of Gujarat and Delhi High Courts.Issue 1: Review of Judgment based on reliance on Gujarat High Court's judgment.The Review Application under Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the Union of India seeking a review of the final judgment allowing the petitioner to file Form 'TRAN-1' by the extended date. The primary argument raised was that the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, upon which reliance was placed, itself was under review, and the implementation of directions had been stayed. The High Court, after detailed hearing and perusal of records, found no ground to review the judgment dated 04.11.2019. The Court noted that the effort to re-agitate the matter was not within the parameters of seeking a review. The Court highlighted that the findings in the judgment were based on the introduction of the GST regime and the rights of registered persons to carry forward unutilized credit, emphasizing that such rights cannot be taken away on procedural or technical grounds. The Court acknowledged that the findings were in line with the view taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, but also mentioned reliance on a similar view expressed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. The Court concluded that the stay of implementation by the Gujarat High Court was not a sufficient ground to review the judgment, suggesting that the appropriate remedy for the Revenue would be to approach the Supreme Court by filing an appeal.Issue 2: Consideration of findings in the judgment dated 04.11.2019.The judgment dated 04.11.2019 highlighted various reasons why unutilized credit arising from duty/tax paid under erstwhile Acts is considered a vested right that cannot be taken away on procedural or technical grounds. The Court emphasized that registered persons under the Central Excise Act or VAT Act must carry forward unutilized credit as per the requirements of the CGST Act, 2017. It was noted that the Respondent authorities had complete records of registered persons and could verify facts and figures, hence, could not deprive petitioners of their valuable credit rights. The Court observed that despite the stay of implementation by the Gujarat High Court, the judgment's reliance on the views of the Gujarat and Delhi High Courts remained valid. The Court dismissed the Review Application, affirming the judgment allowing the filing of Form 'TRAN-1' by the extended date.This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the Court's reasoning behind dismissing the Review Application and upholding the earlier judgment allowing the petitioner to file Form 'TRAN-1' by the extended date based on the rights of registered persons under the GST regime.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
