M/S Century Tranmission Faridabad vs. Union Of INDIA And Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Century Transmission, 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. Counsel for the parties informed the Court that the Supreme Court had passed specific directions on July 22, 2022, in the aforementioned SLP matters. 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 included opening the common portal for filing or revising forms for availing Transitional Credit through TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 for two months (September 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022). The Supreme Court further directed that aggrieved registered assessees could file or revise forms irrespective of whether they had filed a writ petition or if their case was decided by the ITGRC. GSTN was directed to ensure no technical glitches occurred. Concerned officers were given 90 days thereafter to verify claims and pass orders on merits after granting an opportunity to parties. 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. In light of these Supreme Court directions, the counsel for the petitioner stated that they did not press the instant petition. The petition was disposed of in terms of the Supreme Court's order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the directions issued by the Supreme Court in SLP (C) Nos. 7425-7428 of 2020 on July 22, 2022, are to be complied with by the concerned authorities. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner, through their counsel, acknowledged the Supreme Court's directions and consequently did not press the writ petition. Respondents' Argument: The respondents, Union of India & others and the State of Haryana, were represented, and their counsel brought the Supreme Court's order to the High Court's notice. No specific argument was recorded for the respondents other than their participation in bringing the Supreme Court's order to the Court's attention.
Sections Cited
TRAN-1, TRAN-2
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.