M/S Goodwill Enterprises Faridabad vs. Union Of INDIA And Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Goodwill Enterprises, Faridabad, filed a writ petition before the Punjab & Haryana High Court. 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, concerning the filing of transitional credit forms TRAN-1 and TRAN-2. Following these directions, the counsel for the petitioner stated that the instant petition was not being pressed.
Held
The Court noted that the Supreme Court, in its order dated 22.07.2022 in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020, had issued specific directions. These directions included opening a common portal by the Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTN) for filing forms TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for two months (September 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022). Aggrieved registered assessees were directed to file or revise their forms, irrespective of whether they had filed a writ petition or if their case was decided 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. Allowed transitional credit was to be reflected in the Electronic Credit Ledger. The High Court observed that these directions had to be meticulously complied with by the concerned authorities. Consequently, the counsel for the petitioner did not press the instant petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Supreme Court's directions dated 22.07.2022 in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020, regarding the opening of a common portal for filing transitional credit forms TRAN-1 and TRAN-2, are to be complied with by the concerned authorities. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner, through its counsel, did not press the writ petition in light of the Supreme Court's directions. This implies acceptance and reliance on the Supreme Court's order. Respondents' contention: The respondents, Union of India and others, were represented, and the judgment notes that counsel for the parties brought the Supreme Court's order to the Court's notice. The judgment implicitly acknowledges the binding nature of the Supreme Court's order on the authorities.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Permission to file Special Leave Petition (s) is allowed.
Delay condoned.
Having heard learned Additional Solicitor General, learned counsel appearing for different States and learned counsel appearing for different private parties and having perused the record, we are of the view that it is just and proper to issue th
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.