TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (8) TMI 1122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of non-banking financial company engaged in financing automobiles in the form of loans and financial leases to its customer and has operations in 14 States across India, including in the State of Telangana. For the purposes of carrying on business in the State of Telangana, the petitioner obtained registration under the provisions of the Telangana State Value Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short, 'the TVAT Act'), as well as under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994, for the purpose of service tax payable on leasing activity. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that upon introduction of Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'GST Act'), w.e.f. 01.07.2017, the petitioner got itself registered under the CGST Act and SGST Act, in the State of Telangana and has been filing returns and paying applicable GST both under CGST and SGST on its transactions without any adverse remarks. 4. It is the further contention of the petitioner that with the introduction of GST, with effect from 01.07.2017, and in terms of provisions of Section 142(11)(c) of the CGST Act read with Section 142(10)(c) of the TGST Act, the petitioner became entitled to take credit of Value Added Tax or Servi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hough it had encountered certain technical difficulties/glitches on the GSTN portal, even while uploading the above information, however, by making efforts, the petitioner could upload the information in Form GST TRAN-1 on 27.12.2017 at 11.13 AM; that upon uploading the Form GST TRAN-1 electronically, the petitioner received acknowledgment of successful filing of the said form electronically and received an Application Reference Number ('ARN') AA361117203771H; and that in addition to receiving the ARN number, the petitioner also received the confirmation mail from an email ID of the respondents "[email protected]" confirming the successful filing of the transition form by the petitioner and the ARN number provided to the petitioner for the above said filing made. 10. Petitioner contends that despite the petitioner successfully uploading the information and submission of Form GST TRAN-1 for transition of credit of Rs. 21,07,574/-, as claimed in column 11 of the said form, the same was not reflected in the online electronic credit ledger of the petitioner maintained by the respondents. The petitioner would thus, contend that non-reflection of the transitional credit in the onl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from the 4th respondent. 14. As no response was forthcoming from the respondents, nor the transitional credit claimed is getting reflected in its electronic ledger, the petitioner once again on 13.05.2020, addressed a letter to the GST Telangana Commissionerate and requested the said authority to consider the issue and refer the matter to the 2nd respondent for redressal. An email dt. 15.05.2020 was sent to the 2nd respondent, requesting for resolving the issue of transitional credit at the earliest, so that the petitioner company can overcome the issue of outflow of cash flow during Covid-19 period. 15. Upon the petitioner addressing the letter dt. 13.05.2020 and e-mail dt.15.05.2020, the petitioner received an email communication dt.05.06.2020 from the Assistant Commissioner of the State GST i.e., 3rd respondent, informing the petitioner that the case of the petitioner was sent to ITGRC through GSTN, but the same was not considered for reopening for filing Form GST TRAN-1, "as no technical issues were noticed in their log." 16. The petitioner contends that the said e-mail communication is wholly improper, a non-speaking and arbitrary, for the reason that it did not cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tant Solicitor General, appearing for the respondents. 23. Firstly, it is to be noted that though a counter-affidavit, which is no short of an exposition on GST law is filed by respondents 1 and 6, the same does not answer the specific grievance of the petitioner anywhere. Secondly, by the counter-affidavit, the respondents in one breathe claim that the network has been working seamlessly and without failure, as a result of which, large number of people have filed Form GST TRAN-1 returns correctly within the prescribed time and it is only handful of persons, like the petitioner, who did not do so. However, by the same counter affidavit, the respondents on the other hand state that as large taxpayers have faced IT glitches on GSTN network, on the recommendation of GST Council in its 26th meeting held on 10.03.2018, an IT Grievance Redressal Mechanism (ITGRM) was put in place, vide CBIC Circular No.39/13/2018-GST dt.03.04.2018, wherein cases pertaining to non-filing of Form GST TRAN-1 due to IT glitches was sought to be addressed and also the period for submitting declarations electronically was extended. The said stand of the respondents is self-contradictory, to say the least. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... TRAN-1 before the due date, i.e. by 27.12.2017. 26. The respondents, being fully aware of the situation that prevailed with regard to the working of the network, instead of being sensitive to the issue, and taking steps proactively to resolve the grievance of the petitioner, chose to make allegation of negligence on the part of the petitioner without any basis. If only the petitioner acted in a negligent manner, the petitioner would not have uploaded the form on 27.12.2017 at 11.13 AM from its system by logging into the GSTN network maintained by the respondents. The petitioner can have control only on its system and but not on the working of the GSTN network. Once, the petitioner has uploaded the required information by submitting the Form GST TRAN-1 electronically on the portal by using its system, the duty cast on a responsible taxpayer gets complete and it is for the authorities to ensure that their systems capture the information fed in by the taxpayer correctly, and no hardship is caused to the taxpayer. 27. In the facts of the present case, even though the petitioner is in receipt of an acknowledgment number and also an email confirming successful submission of the Fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e denied to be transitioned at the initial stage itself. 30. In an identical situation, in petitioner's own case, the Bombay High Court in WP-LD-VC-85 of 2020 considering a similar issue of transitional credit of Rs. 17,07,673/- claimed through TRAN-1 filed on 27.12.2017 not being transitioned into the petitioner's electronic credit ledger despite successful filing, by its judgement dt.29.10.2020 while observing that the action of the respondents is unfair and unjust, held as under: "18. At the outset, we must say that it is not disputed that Petitioner's Form GST TRAN-1 filing on 27th December, 2017 was successful. The only issue is that the credit of Rs. 17,07,673/- has not been transitioned in the Petitioner's electronic credit ledger despite the successful filing. It is not also in dispute that after filing TRAN-1, which filing was successful, the credit of Rs. 17,07,673/- is not appearing in the Petitioner's electronic credit ledger/register and despite making grievance to the authorities, as discussed earlier, Petitioner did not receive any positive response. We are unable to comprehend that even though, admittedly, the filing was successful, the credit is not bei....