High Court Allows GST Transitional Credit Restoration Through Mandamus Relief Under Filco Trade Centre Precedent

HC granted mandamus relief to petitioner challenging duty levy for Tran-2 form filing. Referencing SC judgment in Filco Trade Centre case, court directed reopening of Tran-1 and Tran-2 forms for transactional credit. Petition disposed without costs, allowing petitioner to upload relevant materials before specified deadline.

---

---

Issues:
1. Writ of mandamus sought to declare respondent's action in levying duty for not filing Tran-2 forms as illegal.
2. Allegation of petitioner's mistake in filing Tran-1 form incorrectly.
3. Reference to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India v. Filco Trade Centre Private Limited.
4. Request for directions to open Tran-1 and Tran-2 for transactional credit.
5. Observations on the keeping open of Tran-1 and Tran-2 post the Apex Court judgment.
6. Disposal of the writ petition with no costs.

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to challenge the respondent's levy of duty amounting to Rs. 48,80,172 with interest for not submitting Tran-2 forms, despite the petitioner's attempts on specific dates. The petitioner alleged a mistake in filing the Tran-1 form incorrectly, which was deemed illegal, arbitrary, and unjust under the new GST Act. The petitioner requested the respondents to open the Tran-2 form or accept it manually, seeking appropriate relief under the circumstances.

During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel referred to a judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Union of India v. Filco Trade Centre Private Limited, emphasizing that the respondent authorities must open Tran-1 and Tran-2 for transactional credit within a specified period. The petitioner urged the court to issue necessary directions based on the mentioned judgment, which was acknowledged by the learned Senior Standing Counsel without dispute.

In light of the information provided by both parties regarding the keeping open of Tran-1 and Tran-2 following the Apex Court's judgment, the court observed that the petitioner could benefit from this decision by uploading relevant material through Tran-1 and Tran-2 before a specified deadline. Consequently, the court disposed of the writ petition without imposing any costs and directed the closure of any pending interlocutory applications.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the petitioner's grievances regarding the levy of duty and incorrect filing of forms, referencing a significant Apex Court decision and providing directions for the resolution of the matter in favor of the petitioner within a specified timeframe.

---