Court affirms judgment on GST transitional credit, emphasizes reliance on press release deadline

The court upheld the Single Judge's judgment, dismissing the appeal by the Union of India and GST Council. The judgment directed the opening of an online portal for filing GST TRAN-I, allowing the first respondent to carry forward tax credit from the earlier regime. The court found the first respondent justified in relying on the press release deadline and emphasized the entitlement to act on the last day of the transitional phase. The Grievance Redressal Committee's hyper-technical approach was deemed incorrect, and the judgment was specified as not setting a precedent for future cases.

---

---

Issues:
1. Direction to open an online portal for filing GST TRAN-I.
2. Entitlement to carry forward tax credit under the earlier regime.
3. Validity of press release regarding deadline for filing GST TRAN-I.
4. Allegation of technical error in the common portal.
5. Interpretation of time limit extension for filing GST TRAN-I.
6. Consideration of dealer's reliance on press release during transitional stage.
7. Approach of Grievance Redressal Committee in dealing with issues.

Analysis:
1. The judgment involved a direction to open an online portal for the first respondent to file form GST TRAN-I electronically or manually. The Union of India and GST Council appealed against this direction.

2. The first respondent, an assessee under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, migrated to the GST regime seeking to carry forward tax credit from the earlier regime. A press release indicated a deadline for filing GST TRAN-I, leading the first respondent to attempt filing before the specified date.

3. The appeal challenged the finding of the Single Judge, arguing that there was no technical error in the common portal warranting the direction issued. The press release also mentioned that relevant notifications for decisions would follow, requiring verification before assuming an extended deadline.

4. The court acknowledged the press release issued on 20.11.2017, noting the absence of subsequent clarification or notification regarding any mistake in the specified date. Dealers relied on such statements, and the first respondent acted within the presumed deadline, not at fault for timing the filing closer to the expiry date.

5. Considering the circumstances, the court found the first respondent justified in assuming the availability of facilities to upload the form until 30.12.2017. The court emphasized that a person bound by a deadline is entitled to wait until the last day to act, especially during a transitional phase.

6. The court highlighted the difficulties faced by both assesses and the department during the transition to the new tax regime. A Grievance Redressal Committee dealt with the first respondent's issue in a hyper-technical manner, which the court deemed incorrect.

7. Ultimately, the court upheld the Single Judge's judgment, dismissing the appeal. The court clarified that the judgment should not serve as a precedent for future cases, emphasizing its applicability to the singular circumstances of the case.

---