Landmark Ruling: Transitional Input Tax Credit Under CGST Act Section 140(3) Clarifies Rights and Compliance Mechanisms

HC ruled on challenges to Section 140(3) of CGST Act, 2017 regarding transitional input tax credit. The court disposed of the petition in alignment with Apex Court directions, addressing issues of credit on goods in stock, vested rights, and GST Common Portal access. The judgment emphasized compliance with previous court orders and maintained consistency with other HC rulings on similar GST-related legal questions.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to the provisions of Section 140(3) of the CGST Act, 2017 regarding transitional provisions for input tax credit.
2. Quashing of a specific question in the GST FAQs related to denial of taking credit on goods lying in stock as of a certain date.
3. Seeking to protect vested rights for passing on credit accrued as of a specific date.
4. Compliance with directions issued by the Apex Court regarding Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 forms.
5. Extension of time for opening the GST Common Portal and keeping all questions of law concerning Section 140 of the CGST Act open.
6. Disposal of petitions by other High Courts in line with the directions of the Apex Court in a similar case.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the provisions of Section 140(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, claiming them to be unreasonable, arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of constitutional articles. The court noted contentions from both sides but highlighted the directions issued by the Apex Court in a related case, emphasizing the need to comply with those directions.

2. The petitioner sought to quash a specific question in the GST FAQs that referred to a condition in Section 140(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, denying the taking of credit on goods in stock as of a specified date. The court considered this request in light of the petitioner's arguments but ultimately disposed of the petition in alignment with the directions issued by the Apex Court and other High Courts.

3. Additionally, the petitioner requested protection for vested rights to pass on credit accrued as of a particular date. The court, after reviewing the circumstances and relevant judgments, decided to dispose of the petition in accordance with the orders and directions issued by the Apex Court and other High Courts, ensuring consistency in approach.

4. The court highlighted the directions issued by the Apex Court regarding the opening of a common portal for filing forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for a specified period. It emphasized the need for compliance with these directions to facilitate the process for aggrieved registered assessees.

5. Furthermore, the court addressed the extension of time for opening the GST Common Portal and the decision to keep all questions of law concerning Section 140 of the CGST Act open. It noted the importance of adhering to these directives and ensuring alignment with the decisions made by the Apex Court in related matters.

6. Lastly, the court referenced the disposal of petitions by other High Courts, such as the High Court of Kerala and the Dharwad Bench, in line with the directions issued by the Apex Court in a similar case. This reference underscored the need for consistency and uniformity in addressing legal issues related to transitional provisions and input tax credit under the GST regime.

---