Geep Industries (INDIA) PVT. LTD. vs. The Union Of INDIA And 7 Ors.

Held

The Court held that if a provision is made for electronic filing of returns and technical glitches prevent timely uploading, the concerned individual or firm should not be put at a disadvantage. The Court noted that the petitioner was ready to file TRAN-2 electronically but could not due to portal issues, leading them to seek manual filing, which was previously considered by the Court. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's claim of attempting electronic filing and the mention in the affidavit-in-opposition that the GST Council was apprised of the situation. The Court directed that the GST Council (Respondent No. 3) would examine the petitioner's grievance and allow them to file the TRAN-1 form either electronically or manually, as they may decide, to prevent the petitioner from being deprived of eligible ITC. This exercise was to be completed within three weeks of receiving a certified copy of the order. The Court observed that the current petition could be disposed of with similar directions as a previous related writ petition.

Facts

The petitioner, Geep Industries (India) Pvt. Ltd., approached the Gauhati High Court challenging the respondent authorities' refusal to allow them to submit GST TRAN-2 return. This followed a previous writ petition (WP(C) No. 4901/2018) where the petitioner had complained about the GST portal not accepting TRAN-2 returns since July 2017. In the earlier petition, the Court had directed the authorities to facilitate the submission of Form GST TRAN-2, either electronically or manually, based on a statement made by the respondent authorities. The current petition alleges that despite this direction, the authorities refused to accept the TRAN-2 form, electronically or manually, on the grounds that the petitioner failed to demonstrate genuine difficulty in uploading the form.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent authorities were justified in refusing to allow the petitioner to submit GST TRAN-2 return electronically or manually, despite a previous High Court order directing facilitation of such submission. (Question of law and fact, concerning the interpretation and implementation of the Court's previous order and the provisions related to GST return filing). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that it would be impossible to prove that all efforts were made or that there was no negligence in uploading the form due to technical glitches in the GST portal. They argued that the refusal to accept the TRAN-2 form would deprive them of input tax credit (ITC) benefits. They relied on the previous court order which directed the authorities to allow manual or electronic filing. Revenue's arguments: The respondents, through the Assistant Solicitor General of India, submitted that the Commissioner of GST examined the petitioner's grievances and found that while TRAN-1 was filed successfully, the petitioner did not submit correct information and did not revise the return within the stipulated time. They also referred to a letter from the Board stating that re-opening the portal or allowing manual filing due to technical glitches might not be in consonance with the statutory framework of GST law.