Gallops Infrastructure LTD vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to transitional input tax credit. The Court considered Order No. 01/2020-GST dated 7th February, 2020, issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, which extended the time limit for submitting Form GST TRAN-1 for registered persons who faced technical difficulties on the common portal. The Court also relied on the decision in M/S Siddharth Enterprises Vs. The Nodal Officer, which established that CENVAT credit is a property of the assessee and cannot be appropriated due to procedural delays in filing declarations, particularly when the due date under Rule 117 is considered procedural and not mandatory. The Court directed the respondents to permit the petitioner to upload the saved Form GST TRAN-1 within two weeks from the receipt of the order.

Facts

The petitioner, Gallops Infrastructure Ltd., sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to grant transitional input tax credit under Section 140 of the GST Acts. The petitioner claimed that due to a technical glitch, they were unable to upload Form GST TRAN-1, although they managed to save it online. The petitioner sought to carry forward Cenvat credit of Rs. 59,37,604 and excess input tax credit of Rs. 7,05,676 from the previous regime. The IT Grievance Redressal Committee had observed that the petitioner's case did not involve a technical glitch, and thus, they were not permitted to upload the form. The petitioner contended that there was no fault on their part.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to transitional input tax credit under Section 140 of the Central/Gujarat Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, and Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, 2017, despite failing to upload Form GST TRAN-1 due to a technical glitch, when the form was saved online? The petitioner argued that a technical glitch prevented the successful uploading of Form GST TRAN-1, and they should not be faulted for this. They relied on Section 140 of the GST Acts to claim the transitional credit. They also referred to the decision in M/S Siddharth Enterprises Vs. The Nodal Officer, which held that CENVAT credit earned under the erstwhile law is property and cannot be appropriated merely for failing to file a declaration, especially when the due date under Rule 117 is procedural. The respondent argued that the IT Grievance Redressal Committee found no technical glitch in the petitioner's case, implying the petitioner was not eligible for an extension or special consideration.