M/S Madhavji And Co. Thru Sole Prop. Kamlesh Madhavji vs. The Union Of INDIA Thru The Secretary, Ministry Of Law And Justice 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 be filed or corrected preferably within three weeks. The jurisdictional assessing authority was directed to pass orders on these forms within six weeks, considering the observations made in the previous 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 of TRAN-1, and where the petitioner is otherwise eligible for credit, the Court may grant an opportunity to rectify or file the form, even if statutory deadlines have passed, by referring to and following prior High Court judgments that have adopted a similar approach.

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 was the inability of the petitioners to file or amend their TRAN-1 Forms due to alleged technical glitches. The petitioners sought an opportunity to rectify or file these forms, which are crucial for claiming transitional input tax credit under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime. The respondents, including the Union of India and the State of Maharashtra, contended that the time limits prescribed for filing TRAN-1 under Section 117 of the CGST Act were mandatory and that no extension or amendment should be permitted after the expiry of the stipulated period.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners can be granted an opportunity to file or amend their TRAN-1 Forms, despite the expiry of the prescribed time limit under Section 117 of the CGST Act, 2017, if the delay was caused by technical glitches? The petitioners argued that human errors should be rectifiable and that if technical glitches prevented the timely filing or amendment of TRAN-1 Forms, an opportunity should be granted. They relied on the Bombay High Court's judgment in Heritage Lifestyles and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India. They also referred to a recent order by the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 1690 of 2019, which allowed correction of TRAN-1 and filing of TRAN-2. The respondents contended that the period prescribed under Section 117 of the CGST Act is mandatory and that petitioners have no right to file or amend TRAN-1 after the stipulated time. They cited the Bombay High Court's judgment in NELCO Ltd. vs. Union of India.