M/S Blue Bird Pure PVT. LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.

W.P.(C)/3798/2019HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01018429201922 July 2019Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH7 pages

For Petitioner: Mrs. Anjali J. Manish and Mr. Priyadarshi Manish, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Mr. Anil Dabas and Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocates for Respondent No. 1 Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 with Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advocate Mr. Satyakam, ASC, Govt. Of NCT of Delhi/ Respondent Nos. 4 and 5

AI SummaryAllowed

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's error was bona fide and that the GST system's lack of a rectification facility for such errors was a genuine difficulty. The Court directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to file a rectified TRAN-1 Form.

Facts

The petitioner inadvertently filled the stock quantity in the wrong column of the GST TRAN-1 Form, preventing them from claiming CENVAT credit. Despite representations, the system did not allow rectification, leading to the inability to file subsequent returns.

Key Issues

Whether the petitioner should be allowed to rectify an inadvertent error in the GST TRAN-1 Form to claim transitional credit, given the system's limitations.

Sections Cited

Section 140(5), Section 164, Rule 117

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

W.P.(C) 3798/2019 Page 1 of 7 $~70 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3798/2019 M/S BLUE BIRD PURE PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mrs. Anjali J. Manish and Mr. Priyadarshi Manish, Advocates versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Anil Dabas and Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocates for Respondent No. 1 Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 with Ms. Suhani Mathur, Advocate Mr. Satyakam, ASC, Govt. Of NCT of Delhi/ Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH

O R D E R %

22.07.

2019

Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:

Notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel for the Respondents.

Counter-affidavit filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 is already on record.

The Petitioner is a company having its registered office in New Delhi, engaged in the manufacturing and trading of water purifiers. It is duly

W.P.(C) 3798/2019

registered with the Excise Department and under the Central Excise Act, 1944 and

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.