M/S Samanta Engineering Works vs. The Commnr. (GST)

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s. Samanta Engineering Works, sought to file Form GST-TRAN-1, the deadline for which was December 27, 2017. The Petitioner took no action for approximately two years after the deadline. On November 26, 2019, the Petitioner submitted a letter to the Opposite Parties, the Commissioner (GST) and others, requesting permission to file the Form manually. The Petitioner did not provide a reasonable explanation for the two-year delay in making this request, indicating a lack of diligence in pursuing its grievances.

Held

The Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petition and issue any directions to the Opposite Parties. The reasoning was based on the Petitioner's admitted delay of nearly two years after the deadline for filing Form GST-TRAN-1, coupled with the absence of a reasonable explanation for this delay. The Court found that the Petitioner was not diligent in pursuing its grievances. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed. No specific provisions of the GST Act were discussed in relation to the dismissal, as the decision rested on the Petitioner's lack of diligence and the Court's discretion in entertaining a writ petition under such circumstances.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to file Form GST-TRAN-1 manually, given the significant delay and lack of reasonable explanation for the two-year period after the deadline? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of diligence and procedural compliance). Petitioner's Argument: The Petitioner implicitly argued for the right to file the form manually, seeking permission from the authorities. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the Petitioner beyond the request for manual filing. Revenue/State's Argument: The Opposite Parties did not file a formal response or present arguments as recorded in the judgment. The Court's decision was based on the Petitioner's own narrated facts and lack of diligence.