Union Of INDIA vs. M/S Steel Authority Of INDIA LTD And Ors

Held

The Court dismissed the miscellaneous appeals filed by the Union of India. While affirming the substantial part of the order and directions issued by the learned writ Court, the Court slightly modified the directions. Instead of directing the portal to be opened, the Court adopted a more assessee-friendly approach, drawing from the decision in Hans Raj Sons vs. Union of India. The modified direction grants liberty to the writ petitioner/assessee to file their individual tax credit in GSTR-3B Forms for the month of January 2022, to be filed in February 2022. The concerned authority/Assessing Officer would then be at liberty to verify the genuineness of such claims. The Court found this to be a workable solution, allowing the Assessing Officer to examine the legality of the claim once the form is filed. The ratio decidendi is that in cases of technical difficulties preventing assessees from availing legitimate ITC due to transition to GST, a practical and workable solution should be provided to avoid prejudice to the assessee, even if it involves a modification of the original directions.

Facts

This appeal by the Union of India is directed against a common order dated March 4, 2020, passed in a batch of writ petitions. The High Court had previously dismissed similar appeals filed by the Union of India in another batch of cases (MAT 552 of 2020) by a judgment dated December 14, 2021. In those dismissed appeals, the High Court had observed that the issue of difficulties in filing revised Form TRAN-1 was a pan-India problem. The Court had referred to decisions from the Madras High Court in Commissioner of GST and Central Excise vs. Bharat Electronic Ltd., the Bombay High Court in Heritage Lifestyles and Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India, and the Allahabad High Court in Ratek Pheon Friction Technologies Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner. The Allahabad High Court had noted technical difficulties with the GST portal immediately after its introduction. The Supreme Court had also dismissed a Special Leave Petition against the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision in Adfert Technologies (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court was justified in directing the revenue authorities to allow the writ petitioners to file a revised Form TRAN-1, considering the technical difficulties faced by assessees in transitioning to the GST regime and claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC). Petitioner's Arguments (Union of India): The judgment does not explicitly record arguments made by the Union of India in this specific appeal. However, the context implies that the Union of India was challenging the directions issued by the learned Single Judge to open the portal for filing revised TRAN-1 forms. Respondent's Arguments (M/s. Steel Authority of India Ltd. & ors.): The judgment does not explicitly record arguments made by M/s. Steel Authority of India Ltd. & ors. in this specific appeal. However, the context implies that the writ petitioners sought directions to file revised TRAN-1 forms due to technical issues, relying on the principle of substantial compliance and decisions from various High Courts that had granted similar relief.