Court Affirms Denial of Transitional Credit for Pre-2017 Supplies Due to Late Application; Advises Statutory Remedies.

The HC upheld the Commissioner's decision to deny transitional credit for inward supplies made before 01.07.2017, as the application for extension was filed five years late. The court found the rejection lawful and within jurisdiction, affirming the original order dated 13.03.2023. The petitioner was advised to seek statutory remedies if dissatisfied. The time spent on the writ petition will be excluded from the limitation period for filing an appeal against the order. The writ petition was disposed of due to insufficient grounds for further consideration.

---

---

Issues:
The judgment involves the quashing of orders denying transitional credit for inward supplies made before 01.07.2017 and rejecting the application for extending the limitation for claiming transitional credit.

Transitional Credit Claim:
The petitioner sought to claim transitional credit under the GST Act for inward supplies made before 01.07.2017. The GST Act allows for claiming input tax credit within thirty days, extendable by the Commissioner for another thirty days. The petitioner failed to obtain an order from the Commissioner to extend the period of limitation beyond thirty days. The Commissioner rejected the application for extension as it was filed belatedly after five years from the prescribed date, leading to denial of transitional credit.

Commissioner's Decision:
The Commissioner's rejection of the application for extending the limitation period was deemed lawful and within jurisdiction. The denial of transitional credit in respect of input tax was upheld in the original order dated 13.03.2023. The petitioner was advised to seek statutory remedies if aggrieved by the said order. The period spent in prosecuting the writ petition would be excluded from calculating the period of limitation for filing an appeal against the order.

Conclusion:
The writ petition was disposed of with the finding that there was insufficient substance to entertain it further. The petitioner was directed to pursue statutory remedies if dissatisfied with the order denying transitional credit. The judgment clarified that the time spent on the writ petition would not count towards the limitation period for appealing the order.

---