https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396010 Transitional ITC under the earlier tax regime was treated as a protected vested entitlement, and the retrospective insertion of "within such time" in Section 140 of the CGST Act did not defeat relief recognised in Brand Equity. The court held that Rule 117 timelines are directory because the Act and Rules prescribe no consequence for delay, and the remedial mechanism cannot be confined only to portal glitches under Rule 117(1A). It further held that a bona fide clerical error in TRAN-1 could be corrected, and an unreasoned rejection was arbitrary. Relief was granted by directing revision of TRAN-1 and processing of the credit claim. en-us Tue, 16 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Mar 2025 12:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396010 Transitional ITC under the earlier tax regime was treated as a protected vested entitlement, and the retrospective insertion of "within such time" in Section 140 of the CGST Act did not defeat relief recognised in Brand Equity. The court held that Rule 117 timelines are directory because the Act and Rules prescribe no consequence for delay, and the remedial mechanism cannot be confined only to portal glitches under Rule 117(1A). It further held that a bona fide clerical error in TRAN-1 could be corrected, and an unreasoned rejection was arbitrary. Relief was granted by directing revision of TRAN-1 and processing of the credit claim. Case-Laws GST Tue, 16 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396010