The State Of Karnataka vs. The Union Of INDIA And Others

“Whether the learned Single Judge was justified in issuing writ of mandamus against the appellants to facilitate respondent No.2 to reflect his input tax credit on electronic ledger or to consider physical hard copies furnished by him in that regard?” is the question involved in this case.

Respondent No.2 is a registered dealer under the provisions of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and was allotted GST IN 29AADC17257B1ZK for the purpose of his business of manufacturer and sale of pharmaceuticals etc. For that purpose, respondent No.2 was registered under KVAT Act 2003 and certificate in that regard was issued to respondent No.

Accordingly, the payments of necessary taxes under the KVAT Act, 2003 were being made until coming into force of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 on 01.07.2017. Respondent No.2 was permitted to carry forward the Central Credit under CENVAT Regime to CGST regime by claiming electronic credit submitting necessary form of TRAN-1. Accordingly, respondent No.2 was required to upload the said claim of credit by 27.12.2017. 4. Respondent No.2 claimed that despite his efforts to upload the said form to claim the credit, the electronic credit ledger of the petitioner was not being shown on the web portal of the appellants. Respondent No.2 contended that though it was entitled to claim benefit of Rs.16,27,341/- as carry forward input tax credit, the web portal on his account was showing as zero credit balance.

Despite respondent No.2 raising the grievance with the appellants, for rectifying the same, though the complaints were registered, they were not addressed with any remedy. Respondent No.2 admittedly made several representations to appellant Nos.2 to 4 in that regard. Ultimately, respondent No.2 filed W.P.No.226277/2020 (T-RES) seeking writ of mandamus against the appellants and the other official respondents herein to make arrangements for reflecting in his electronic credit ledger the CENVAT Credit amount of Rs.16,27,341/- as shown in the TRAN-1 form submitted by it or permitting it to submit the manual copies of the same. Respondent No.2 also sought the writ of mandamus to consider it’s complaints by the appellants and the other official respondents.

The learned Single Judge, by the impugned order, allowed the writ petition holding that as per Section 140 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 a registered person is entitled to such carry forward in his electronic credit ledger from CENVAT to GST. The learned Single Judge held that in view of Section 140, the appellants and the other official respondents therein have statutory duty rectifying the electronic ledger to reflect the carry forward amount of input credit tax.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 drawing attention of this Court to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 22.07.2022 in Union of India & Anr. vs. FILCO Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed the Goods and Service Tax Network to open common portal for filing concerned forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for two months i.e. from 01.09.2022 to 31.10.2022. The said judgment further shows that liberty was given to aggrieved assessee to file the relevant form or revise the already filed form irrespective of whether the tax payer has filed writ petition before the High Court or not. In the said judgment GSTN is also directed to ensure that there is no technical glitch during the said period.

In compliance of the said judgment, the Government of India has issued Circular No.180/12/2022-GST dated 09.09.2022, a copy of which is placed before this Court. In para-3 of the said circular, referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Central Government has stated that common portal will be opened for filing TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 or revising the earlier filed TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for the benefit of the aggrieved registered assessees. In para-4.1 to 4.7 the aggrieved assessees are permitted to upload their declaration of TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 or revised form also.

Firstly, there is no infirmity in the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Secondly, in view of the subsequent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in FILCO Trade Centre Private Limited’s case referred supra and the Circular of the Central Government dated 09.09.2022, this writ appeal does not survive for further consideration and is disposed of accordingly.