Super Rubber Industries vs. Union Of INDIA And Another
Facts
The petitioner, Super Rubber Industries, 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 forms for availing transitional credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2. These directions included opening a common portal for a specified period and outlining a procedure for verification and reflection of allowed transitional credit. In light of these Supreme Court 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 22.07.2022 in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020, had issued comprehensive directions. These directions mandated the Goods and Services Tax Network (GSTN) to open a common portal for filing or revising forms for transitional credit (TRAN-1 and TRAN-2) from September 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022. The Supreme Court further directed that any aggrieved registered assessee could file or revise their forms, irrespective of prior writ petitions or decisions by the ITGRC. The concerned officers were given 90 days thereafter to verify claims and pass orders on merits after affording an opportunity to the parties. Allowed transitional credit was to be reflected in the Electronic Credit Ledger. The High Court stated that these directions had to be meticulously complied with by the authorities. In view of these Supreme Court directions, the counsel for the petitioner chose not to press the writ petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Supreme Court's directions dated 22.07.2022 in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020, concerning the opening of a common portal for filing transitional credit forms (TRAN-1 and TRAN-2) and the subsequent procedure for verification and credit reflection, are to be complied with by the concerned authorities. The petitioner's side, by not pressing the petition, implicitly accepted the applicability and binding nature of these directions. The respondents, represented by Sr. Standing Counsel, did not present any arguments against the applicability of the Supreme Court's order, as the matter was disposed of based on the petitioner not pressing the petition in light of the Supreme Court's decision.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 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 following directions in these cases: HARJEET KAUR 2022.08.09 15:41 I attest to 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.