M/S Bm Fasteners PVT. LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s B.M. Fasteners Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Punjab & Haryana High Court. The respondents, Union of India and others, brought to the Court's notice an order from 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 July 22, 2022. This Supreme Court order directed the Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTN) to open a common portal for filing or revising 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 also laid down a procedure for verification and passing of orders on these claims. In light of the respondents' undertaking to comply with the Supreme Court's directions, the petitioner did not press their writ petition.

Held

The Court noted the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Union of India and another versus Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. and another. These directions mandated GSTN to open a common portal for filing or revising TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 forms for availing transitional credit from September 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022. The Supreme Court also directed that any aggrieved registered assessee could file or revise their forms, and concerned officers would have 90 days thereafter to verify the claims and pass orders on merits after granting an opportunity to the parties. The Court was informed that the respondents would meticulously comply with these directions. In light of this undertaking and the Supreme Court's order, the petitioner stated that they did not press their instant writ petition. Therefore, the Court disposed of the petition.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to avail transitional credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 forms, considering the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Union of India and another versus Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. and another (SLP (C) No. 32709-32710 of 2018). The petitioner's contention, implied by their initial filing of the writ petition, was that they were aggrieved by the inability to file or revise their TRAN-1/TRAN-2 forms to claim transitional credit. The respondents' argument, based on the Supreme Court's order, was that a specific mechanism and timeline have been established for all aggrieved registered assessees to file or revise these forms, irrespective of prior litigation or ITGRC decisions. They undertook to comply with these directions.