M/S Ceamen Electronics vs. Union Of INDIA And Others
Held
The Court held that the issue was squarely covered by the judgments of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in *Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India* and the Delhi High Court in *Brand Equity Treaties Ltd. vs. Union of India*. While not declaring Rule 117(1A) ultra vires, the Court found that denying unutilized credit to dealers unable to furnish evidence of attempting to upload TRAN-I, due to technical glitches, would amount to a violation of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution. The Court reasoned that the repeated extensions granted by the respondents for filing TRAN-I in cases of technical glitches vindicated the Petitioner's claim. The Court directed the Respondents to permit the Petitioner to upload Form TRAN-I on or before June 30, 2020. If the Respondents failed to do so, the Petitioner would be at liberty to avail the ITC in question in GSTR-3B of July 2020. The Respondents were granted liberty to verify the genuineness of the Petitioner's claims.
Facts
The Petitioner, M/s Ceamen Electronics, challenged Rule 117(1A) of the Central GST Rules, 2017, and sought permission to electronically upload Form TRAN-I. The Petitioner, a partnership firm dealing in electronic items, was registered under the Punjab VAT Act, 2005, prior to GST implementation on July 1, 2017. They were entitled to claim credit for VAT on inputs held in stock and excess Input Tax Credit (ITC). However, they failed to upload Form TRAN-I by the due date of December 31, 2017. Rule 117(1A) allows the Commissioner to extend the date for submitting the declaration in cases of technical difficulties. The Respondents had extended the last date for filing TRAN-I to March 31, 2020, through an order dated January 1, 2020.
Key Issues
1. Whether Rule 117(1A) of the Central GST Rules, 2017, is ultra vires the Constitution of India, specifically Articles 14 and 300A, by arbitrarily restricting the extension of time for filing Form TRAN-I only to cases of technical difficulties on the common portal? Petitioner's arguments: The Petitioner contended that the issue is covered by the High Court's judgment in *Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India* and the Delhi High Court's decision in *Brand Equity Treaties Ltd. vs. Union of India*. They argued that the Delhi High Court, in *Brand Equity*, permitted petitioners to file TRAN-I by June 30, 2020, and directed respondents to allow similarly situated taxpayers to do so. They also relied on the Delhi High Court's subsequent order in *SKH Sheet Metals Components vs. Union of India* which approved its earlier opinion. Respondents' arguments: The Respondents, through their counsel, were unable to controvert the fact that the issue was squarely covered by the cited judgments.
Sections Cited
Rule 117(1A), Rule 117
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CWP No.8369/2020 #1# 114 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.8369 of 2020(O&M) Date of Decision:-19.06.2020 M/s Ceamen Electronics ......Petitioner. Versus Union of India and others ......Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANT PARKASH Present:- Mr. Sandeep Goyal,Advocate for the petitioner. *** JASWANT SINGH, J. Hearing conducted through Video Conferencing.
The Petitioner through instant petition is challenging vires of Rule 117(1A) of Central GST Rules, 2017 (for short ‘Rules’) and seeking direction to Respondent to permit Petitioner to electronically upload form TRAN-I in order to avail credit of excess VAT reflected in Returns, as due to technical glitches on the GST Portal, the petitioner could not file Form TRAN-I.
The Petitioner-a partnership firm, engaged in the business of trading of Electronic items, is registered with Respondent-GST Authorities under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘CGST Act’). The Petitioner prior to 01.07.2017 i.e. date of introduction of GST was registered under Punjab VAT Act,2005. The Petitioner was entitled to claim RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI 2020.06.19 13:39 I at
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.
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 Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.