The Tyre Plaza vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.
Held
The Court held that the Petitioner is entitled to claim the transitional credit. The reasoning was based on the acknowledgment that the GST system is still in a 'trial and error' phase, and it would be an undue burden on assessees to comply with requirements when they are unable to connect with the system due to technical failures. The Court noted that the Petitioner's eligibility for the ITC was not disputed. The Court urged the ITGRC to review its policy for such cases. The operative direction was that the Respondents must either open the portal to enable the Petitioner to file Form TRAN-1 electronically again, or accept the manually filed TRAN-1 Form. The Petitioner's claim shall then be processed in accordance with law. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, The Tyre Plaza, is a registered dealer under the GST regime. Due to technical glitches on the GST portal, the petitioner was unable to file Form TRAN-1 electronically to claim transitional credit. The total input tax credit (ITC) claimed was Rs. 65,03,389. The GST Network disallowed online submission of Form TRAN-1 after December 27, 2017. The petitioner attempted to file the form manually on May 31, 2019, with its jurisdictional officer, claiming ITC of Rs. 36,09,147 (disclosed in column 7(a)) and carry forward of tax credit of Rs. 28,94,242 (disclosed in column 5(c)). The eligibility of the petitioner to claim this ITC has not been disputed by the respondents.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to claim transitional credit under Form TRAN-1 despite being unable to file it electronically due to technical glitches, and if so, what is the appropriate procedure for filing? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that due to technical glitches beyond its control, it could not file Form TRAN-1 electronically. The eligibility for the ITC of Rs. 65,03,389 is not disputed by the respondents. The petitioner relied on previous orders of the Court in similar cases (Bhargava Motors v. Union of India, Kusum Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, Sanko Gosei Technology India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.) which acknowledged the 'trial and error' phase of the GST system and directed acceptance of manually filed forms. Respondents' arguments: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the respondents regarding the petitioner's inability to file the form. However, the respondents' counsel appeared and accepted notice.
Sections Cited
Section 7(a), Section 5(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R %
2019
CM APPL. 37003/2019 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 8970/2019 & CM APPL. 37002/2019(stay)
Notice. Respective counsel for the Respondents as noted above accepts notice.
This is one other case, where on account of technical glitches, a registered
W.P.(C) 8970/2019
dealer is unable to claim transitional credit under DVAT Act and input tax credit which works out to Rs.65,03,389/-, in Form TRAN–1. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner points out that in the present case, the eligibility of 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 Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.