M/S Allcor Laminates vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Allcor Laminates, Sonipat, filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging an order or action by the revenue authorities concerning GST. The matter was listed for preliminary hearing on November 26, 2020, and was directed to be listed after the decision in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020. The parties brought to the court's notice that the Supreme Court had passed specific directions on July 22, 2022, in the aforementioned SLP matter. Following these directions, the counsel for the petitioner stated that they did not press the instant petition.

Held

The High Court noted that the Supreme Court, in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020, had issued directions on July 22, 2022. These directions mandated the Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTN) to open a common portal for filing or revising TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 forms for two months (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 prior writ petitions or decisions by the ITGRC. GSTN was to ensure no technical glitches, and concerned officers were given 90 days thereafter to verify claims and pass orders on merits after granting an opportunity to parties. The allowed transitional credit would then be reflected in the Electronic Credit Ledger. In light of these Supreme Court directions, the counsel for the petitioner stated they did not press the instant petition. Therefore, the High 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 Supreme Court's directions in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner, through their counsel, did not press the petition, implying acceptance of the Supreme Court's directions and the subsequent procedural path. No specific arguments were recorded for the petitioner regarding the substantive merits of their claim. Respondents' Argument: The respondents, Union of India and others, represented by their counsel, presented the Supreme Court's order which provided a mechanism for availing transitional credit. No specific arguments were recorded for the respondents beyond bringing the Supreme Court's order to the court's attention.