2019 (6) TMI 936

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2 which is not reflected in the electronic credit ledger for the State of Gujarat. (b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to extend the time for filing of GSTR - 38 after the benefit of Rs. 5.21 crores is granted to the petitioner. (c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to refrain from demanding payment of taxes under the Act, till the resolution of the issues raised by the petitioner by the respondents. (d) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition directing the respondents to not impose / waive any late fee, interest and penalty on the petitioner for the delayed filing of GSTR 3B and GSTR - 1 for the period com....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e take notice of the fact that identical petitions have been preferred in the High Court of Bombay and Delhi. We deem fit to quote the order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 23rd January 2019 in the Writ Petition (C) No.8691 of 2018: "1. At the outset, it was submitted that the petitioners have filed the TRAN1 in this case. Electronic credit ledger account is submitted only yesterday. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this development was consequent upon the Bombay High Court direction in W.P.(C) 2229/2018 Indusind Media Communications Ltd. vs. Union of India which had noticed the previous order of this Court, particularly the order dated 16.10.2018 and given further effect to it on account of its directions. A copy ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ioner having jurisdiction over those locations. We are not giving any directions to the Commissioners of Delhi, Gujarat and Karnataka as in terms of Section 25(4) of the Act each registered location/branch is a distinct person. Therefore, on the above basis of being distinct persons under the Act, they have in cases of Delhi locations and Karnataka location (as informed by Shri. Nankani, the learned Senior Counsel), the Petitioner has filed separate Petitions. Moreover, the Commissioners at separate locations/branches (except Mumbai) are not parties before us. Therefore, appropriate order from the jurisdictional Commissioners on the basis of the certificates issued by the Mumbai Commissionerate be obtained by the Petitioners locations/branc....