Ms R P M Pharma Through One Of Its Partner Mr Manoj Kumar Drolia vs. The Goods And Services Tax Network Represented By Its Chairman

Held

The Court held that the petitioner's case is covered by the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Union of India & another Vs. Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. & another. The Supreme Court had directed GSTN to open a common portal for filing concerned forms for availing transitional credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for a specified period, and subsequently extended this period. The Court noted that the petitioner could not submit their TRAN-1 application within the original timelines. In view of the Supreme Court's order, the petitioner was permitted to submit their TRAN-1 application within the extended window period as per the Apex Court's directions. The case of the petitioner was directed to abide by the directions passed by the Supreme Court. The Court disposed of the writ petition accordingly.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. R.P.M. Pharma, sought a direction from the High Court to allow them to file Form GST TRAN-I to carry forward transitional credit from the pre-GST regime to the GST regime. Their representation to this effect was rejected by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Ranchi, Special Circle, via an order dated January 5, 2021. The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India & another Vs. Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. & another, which directed GSTN to open a common portal for filing TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 forms for two months from September 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022. An subsequent order extended this period by four weeks. The petitioner argued that their case falls within the scope of these Supreme Court directions and they should be allowed to file their TRAN-1 application within the granted window.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, M/s. R.P.M. Pharma, is entitled to file Form GST TRAN-I to carry forward transitional credit, despite their prior rejection and the expiry of the original filing period, in light of the Supreme Court's directions in Union of India & another Vs. Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. & another? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the Supreme Court's decision in Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. is applicable to their case. They argued that the Apex Court has allowed any aggrieved registered assessee to file or revise relevant forms, irrespective of whether a writ petition was filed or the case was decided by the ITGRC. Given the extension of the portal opening period by the Supreme Court, the petitioner should also be permitted to avail this window to file their GST TRAN-1 application. Revenue/State's Argument: The counsel for CGST, GSTN, and the State of Jharkhand agreed with the petitioner's submission that their case is covered by the directions passed by the Apex Court in the Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. case.