M/S M.M. Casting P LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s M.M. Casting P Ltd., Faridabad, filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The respondents are the Union of India and others. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history involves the petitioner filing a writ petition challenging an action or order by the revenue authorities. The respondents brought to the Court's notice directions issued by the Supreme Court in SLP (C) No.32709-32710 of 2018, titled Union of India and another versus Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. and another, dated 22.07.2022.

Held

The Court noted that the respondents' counsel brought to its attention the directions issued by the Supreme Court in SLP (C) No.32709-32710 of 2018. These directions mandated that the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) open a common portal for filing concerned forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for a period of two months, from September 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022. The Supreme Court further directed that any aggrieved registered assessee could file or revise the relevant form, irrespective of whether a writ petition was filed or if the case was decided by the Information Technology Grievance Redressal Committee (ITGRC). The concerned officers were given 90 days thereafter to verify the claims and pass appropriate orders. In light of the respondents' submission that there would be meticulous compliance with these Supreme Court directions, the counsel for the petitioner stated that the instant petition was not pressed. Consequently, the High Court disposed of the petition.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) should be directed to open a common portal for filing or revising forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2, considering the Supreme Court's directions in Union of India v. Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. (2022)? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner did not press the instant petition in light of the respondents' submission regarding meticulous compliance with the Supreme Court's directions. Therefore, the petitioner implicitly sought relief based on the Supreme Court's order. Respondents' contention: The respondents submitted that there would be meticulous compliance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in SLP (C) No.32709-32710 of 2018. These directions included opening the GSTN portal for filing/revising TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 forms for two months, allowing aggrieved registered assessees to file or revise forms irrespective of prior writ petitions or ITGRC decisions, ensuring no technical glitches, and providing 90 days for verification and passing of orders.