TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 334
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itioner is a public sector undertaking established to meet requirements of specialized electronic equipment of the Indian Defence Forces. With the onset of the Goods and Services Tax Regime with effect from 01.07.2017, the petitioner came within the sweep of Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act) and was required to file a Form in GST TRAN-1 within a period of 90 days from 01.07.2017 in order to avail the benefit of accumulated CENVAT credit flowing from the erstwhile indirect tax regimes, VAT, Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax. 3. The petitioner did so in time i.e. on 30.10.2017. The TRAN-1 Form uploaded on 30.10.2017 had contained all required details, including details pertaining to eligible ITC, which the petitioner believes ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by communication dated 08.05.2018. On 28.05.2018, a reply was received from the support center of GST to the effect that the last date for filing/revision of TRAN-1 was 27.12.2017 and thus, no revision was possible thereafter. 6. The petitioner had, in the interim, filed monthly returns in time, taking credit of available credit for the periods in question. Upon receipt of reply dated 28.05.2018, having no other option left, Form GSTR-3B was filed for the month of June 2018, wherein the petitioner took credit of the entire credit to which, according to it, it was entitled, of a sum of Rs. 15.78 crores. 7. On 09.08.2018, an explanation was filed by way of a communication addressed to the respondent setting out the background in which For....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in law insofar as the error that has been committed by the petitioner is an inadvertent human error. Moreover, the last date for filing of an application for TRAN-1 and revision of the same cannot be one and the same i.e. 27.12.2018 10. Reliance is placed on the cases of Aagman Services Private Limited Vs. Union of India & Others [(2019) VIL 705 Del]; Carlstahl Craftsman Enterprises Pvt Ltd. Vs. The Union of India and Others [(2021) VIL 369 MAD]; M/s.Ram Autho Vs. The Commissioner of Central Taxes and Central Excise and Others [(2021) TIOL 496 HC MAD GST]; Union of India and Others Vs. M/s.Asiad Paints Ltd. [(2021) TIOL 682 HC KAR GST]; Super India Paper Products Vs. Union of India [(2021) VIL 436 DEL]. 11. He also brings to my notice tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve been framed for decision in W.P.Nos.10344 and 10346 of 2020 as well. In the light of the aforesaid, he would state that there is no merit in the request for revision. 14. Having heard both learned counsels, I am of the view that the writ petition is liable to be allowed. Admittedly, there have been multiple difficulties, both technical and otherwise, that have been faced by assesses and the Department post introduction of GST with effect from 01.07.2017. In such a situation a bonafide human error as in the present case should, in my view, be permitted to be rectified. There is no dispute expressed by the respondents in its counters on the position that the error committed is inadvertent. 15.In any event, the exercise of transitioning ....