High Court grants relief in challenging CENVAT credit disallowance, permits GST Tran-1 filing within 45 days

The High Court allowed the writ petition challenging the disallowance of legitimate un-availed CENVAT credit and failure to file Form GST Tran-1 electronically. Relying on judgments from other High Courts, the court permitted the petitioner to file or revise the form within 45 days. The court emphasized Rule 117 Sub Rule (1A) and granted permission to verify the claim's genuineness without denying the CENVAT/ITC claim. The Supreme Court's dismissal of the Special Leave Petition reinforced the High Court's decision, ultimately allowing the writ petition.

---

---

Issues:
1. Disallowance of legitimate un-availed CENVAT credit on Input services, Inputs, and Capital Goods.
2. Failure to file/upload a declaration electronically in Form GST Tran-1.
3. Comparison with judgments of other High Courts.
4. Dismissal of SLP by the Supreme Court.
5. Permission granted to file or revise incorrect statutory form TRAN-1.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the disallowance of legitimate un-availed CENVAT credit by the Office of Commissioner, Central Goods Service Tax and Central Excise. The disallowance was based on the grounds that the petitioner's case did not fall under the category of technical error. The petitioner contended that the failure to file/upload a declaration electronically in Form GST Tran-1 was due to a technical/system error. The High Court referred to judgments of other High Courts where similar issues were addressed, leading to the allowance of writ petitions in comparable circumstances.

2. The High Court cited the case of Adfret Techonolgies (P.) Ltd. vs. Union Of India, where the Delhi High Court directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to submit the TRAN-1 form electronically or manually and process the claim for Input Tax Credit (ITC) accordingly. The High Court agreed with the findings of the Delhi and Gujarat High Courts and allowed the petitions, emphasizing the importance of Rule 117 Sub Rule (1A) added w.e.f. 10.09.2018. The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) related to the matter.

3. In light of the consistent view taken by various High Courts and the dismissal of the SLP by the Supreme Court, the petitioner was granted permission to file or revise the incorrect statutory form TRAN-1 either electronically or manually within 45 days. The respondents were allowed to verify the genuineness of the claim without denying the petitioner's legitimate CENVAT/ITC claim based on the non-filing of TRAN-1 by a specific date. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed by the High Court.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues raised, the legal arguments presented, the comparison with relevant precedents, and the final decision rendered by the High Court, providing a comprehensive understanding of the case.

---