M/S Primly Enterprises Faridabad vs. Union Of INDIA And Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Primly 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, in the aforementioned Special Leave Petitions. 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 its order dated July 22, 2022, in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020, had issued comprehensive directions. These directions mandated the Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTN) to open a common portal for filing or revising forms for availing transitional credit (TRAN-1 and TRAN-2) from September 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022. The Supreme Court further directed that aggrieved registered assessees could file or revise these forms irrespective of whether they had filed a writ petition or if their case was decided by the ITGRC. The concerned officers were given 90 days thereafter to verify claims and pass orders, with the allowed transitional credit to be reflected in the Electronic Credit Ledger. The High Court observed that these directions had to be meticulously complied with by the authorities. Consequently, the counsel for the petitioner stated they did not press the instant petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Supreme Court's directions in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020, concerning the opening of the GST 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 their counsel, indicated they did not press the writ petition, implicitly accepting the Supreme Court's directions as a resolution or a path forward. Respondents' Contention: The respondents (Union of India & others and DAG, Haryana) were present and represented, but no specific arguments were recorded as they were awaiting the Supreme Court's decision. The judgment notes that the Supreme Court's directions were brought to the Court's notice by the counsel for the parties.
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 the
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.