M/S Subhash Traders vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 Others

Held

The Court allowed the writ petition, following the precedent set in Writ Tax No. 477 of 2021. The judgment directed that all petitioners, including M/s Subhash Traders, must first file a physical copy of Form GST TRAN-1/TRAN-2 before their respective jurisdictional authorities within four weeks from the date of the earlier judgment (September 15, 2021). The jurisdictional authority is then required to submit a report on compliance with Section 140 of the CGST Act and Rule 117 of the CGST Rules. If no objections arise, the authority will facilitate the electronic submission or revision of the form within two weeks. In case of objections, the petitioner will be given one opportunity to correct the physical form within three weeks, after which the authority will submit a report. Finally, the jurisdictional authority will forward the report and the physical form to the GST Network within one week, enabling the GST Network to upload the form or allow the petitioner to do so within a reasonable time. No form submitted under this order will be rejected for being filed outside the original timeline. The petitioner in the present case was directed to comply within one week of the order date (October 23, 2021).

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Subhash Traders, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to upload Form GST TRAN-1 within an extended timeline. This issue was identical to that dealt with in Writ Tax No. 477 of 2021 and other connected matters. The earlier writ petition was allowed on September 15, 2021, with specific directions regarding the filing and processing of Form GST TRAN-1/TRAN-2. The present petition is disposed of on the same terms as the earlier judgment, with the petitioner required to make compliance within one week from the order date of October 23, 2021.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to an extended timeline for uploading Form GST TRAN-1, considering the procedural difficulties faced in filing it electronically. This issue turns on the interpretation and application of Section 140 of the CGST Act and Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, which govern the transition of credit. The petitioner argued that they were unable to file the form within the stipulated period due to technical glitches and sought an opportunity to do so. The respondent, Union of India and others, did not record any specific arguments in the judgment, but their role as the revenue authority implies they would contest the extension of time unless legally mandated. The court's decision in a previous identical matter, Writ Tax No. 477 of 2021, suggests the revenue's position was considered in that instance.