M/S. Ankush Enterprises Through Its Partner vs. The Union Of INDIA Through The Secretary And Anr.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petitions in terms of a previous order dated April 13, 2022, passed by the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court in connected writ petitions. The Court allowed the petitioners to file and correct their TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 Forms. If online filing was not possible, manual filing was permitted. The Court directed that these forms should preferably be filed and/or corrected within three weeks. The jurisdictional assessing authority was instructed to pass orders on these forms within six weeks, considering the observations made in the referenced order. The Court further clarified that any show cause notices issued during adjudication should also take into account the directions and observations in the present order. The ratio decidendi is that in cases of technical glitches preventing timely filing or amendment of TRAN-1/TRAN-2 forms, the Court can grant an opportunity to file or correct them, subject to the authority's consideration of eligibility and relevant provisions.

Facts

Multiple petitioners, including M/s. Ashoka Buildcon Ltd., Hira Movers, and others, filed writ petitions before the Bombay High Court. The core issue in these petitions revolved around the inability of the petitioners to file or amend their TRAN-1 Forms. The petitioners contended that they faced technical glitches or that their requests for amendment, revision, or modification of the TRAN-1 Form were not permitted. The tax authorities, represented by the Union of India and others, argued that the time period prescribed under Section 117 of the CGST Act for filing such forms was mandatory and that no right existed to file or amend after the stipulated period had expired. The petitions were filed across various years, including 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to an opportunity to file or amend their TRAN-1 Forms, despite the expiry of the prescribed time limit, in cases where technical glitches prevented timely filing or amendment, or where requests for amendment were denied? (Section 117, Section 140, Rule 117 of CGST Act/Rules) Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners argued that human errors should be rectifiable and that if technical glitches prevented the filing of TRAN-1 Form, an opportunity to file it should be granted. They relied on the Bombay High Court's judgment in Heritage Lifestyles and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. and a recent Aurangabad Bench judgment in Writ Petition No. 1690 of 2019 (Ambica Fertilizers). Revenue's arguments: The respondents (Union of India and others) contended that the period prescribed under Section 117 of the CGST Act is mandatory. They cited the Bombay High Court's judgment in NELCO Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors., asserting that petitioners have no right to file or amend TRAN-1 Form after the stipulated time has elapsed.