M/S. Divis Laboratories Limited vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 Others

Held

The Court noted that the issue raised in the writ petition was covered by the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India v. Fico Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. (2022 SCC OnLine SC 912). In that decision, the Supreme Court had directed the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) to open the common portal for filing relevant forms for availing transitional credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for two months from September 1, 2022, which was further extended to November 30, 2022. The Supreme Court also directed GSTN to ensure no technical glitches during this extended period and gave concerned officials 90 days thereafter to verify claims and pass appropriate orders, with allowed transitional credit to be reflected in the electronic credit ledger. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of in terms of the Supreme Court's judgment. All other issues raised in the writ petition were expressly left open.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Divi's Laboratories Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an Order-in-Original dated August 19, 2019, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Central Tax, which rejected their refund claim of Rs. 80,49,988/-. This refund was sought for Countervailing Duty (CVD) and Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid on imported inputs used for manufacturing exported goods under an Advance Authorization. The petitioner also sought to declare certain rules and orders related to the filing and revision of Form GST TRAN-1 as ultra vires and arbitrary, and to permit them to revise Form TRAN-1 to claim the aforementioned refund. The petition was filed before the High Court of Telangana.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Order-in-Original No.17/2019 dated 19.08.2019, rejecting the refund of Rs. 80,49,988/-, is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to Section 17(4) read with Section 142(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 265, and 300A of the Constitution of India? (Petitioner's contention: Yes, the order is illegal and arbitrary, and the refund should be granted.) 2. Whether the time limit to file and revise Form GST TRAN-1 specified in Rule 117(1) and the first proviso thereto, and Rule 120A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, are ultra vires Section 140, 164, and Section 174(2)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and also arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India? (Petitioner's contention: Yes, the time limits are ultra vires and arbitrary.) 3. Whether Order No.3/2017-GST dated 21.09.2017, Order No.7/2017-GST dated 28.10.2017, and Order No.9/2017-GST dated 15.11.2017 issued by the Commissioner, GST, are ultra vires Section 140, 164, and Section 174(2)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? (Petitioner's contention: Yes, these orders are ultra vires.) 4. Whether Order No.9/2017-GST dated 15.11.2017 is contrary to the recommendations of the 23rd GST Council meeting dated 10.11.2017, where the time limit for filing Form TRAN-1 was extended to 31.12.2017? (Petitioner's contention: Yes, it is contrary.) 5. Whether the action of closing the facility to file Form GST TRAN-1 on the common portal from 28.12.2017 was illegal? (Petitioner's contention: Yes, it was illegal.) 6. Whether the Petitioner should be permitted to revise Form TRAN-1 to take credit of Rs. 80,49,988/-? (Petitioner's contention: Yes.) Respondents' arguments: Not recorded in the judgment.