Patanjali Ayurved LTD. And Anr. vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 Ors
Held
The Court held that the petitioner's prayer for acceptance of the FORM GST TRAN-1 declaration could be entertained in view of the Government of India's notification dated September 17, 2018, which extended the filing deadline to January 31, 2019. The Court reasoned that the subsequent extension provided an opportunity for taxpayers who faced difficulties to comply. Therefore, the Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to accept or entertain the declaration to be filed by the petitioners in FORM GST TRAN-1 electronically on the online portal, provided that the filing is completed on or before January 31, 2019. No specific issue was left undecided.
Facts
The petitioners, Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. and another, sought a writ of mandamus directing respondents 2 and 3 (Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax, Dibrugarh, and GST Council) to accept their declaration in FORM GST TRAN-1. The petitioners were unable to file this declaration by the original due date due to technical difficulties encountered on the common GST portal. An amendment to the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017, specifically Clause (1A) to sub-Rule (1) of Rule 117, extended the time limit for submitting this declaration. Subsequently, the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, issued a notification dated September 17, 2018, extending the period for filing until January 31, 2019.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to a direction for the respondents to accept their FORM GST TRAN-1 declaration, given the technical difficulties they faced in filing it by the original due date, in light of the subsequent extension of the filing period? The petitioner argued that they could not submit the declaration by the due date due to technical glitches on the common portal. The respondents, through their counsel, submitted that following the notification dated September 17, 2018, which extended the time limit to January 31, 2019, the petitioner's prayer could be entertained. No specific provisions of law were explicitly debated or relied upon by either side beyond the context of the amendment and the notification.
Sections Cited
Rule 117
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010136482018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C) 4173/2018 1:PATANJALI AYURVED LTD. AND ANR. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND HAVING ITS REGD OFFICE AT D-26, PUSHPANJALI BIJWASAN, NEW DELHI- 61, AND HAVING ITS FACTORY AT INDUSTRIAL GROWTH CENTRE (AIDC), BALIPARA, GHORAMARI, TEZPUR, DIST- SONITPUR, ASSAM- 784105 AND REP. BY SRI ACHARYA BALKRISHNA, THE DIRECTOR OF THE PETITIONER COMPANY 2: ACHARYA BALKRISHNA (CHELA SWAMI SHANKAR DEV) ONE OF THE DIRECTORS OF THE PETITIONER NO.1 COMPANY R/O- KRIPALUBAGH ASHRAM KANKHAL HARIDWAR UTTARAKHAN VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA, MIN OF FINANCE, DEPTT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI 2:THE COMMISSIONER CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DIBRUGARH MILAN NAGAR LANE F P.O- C R BUILDING DIBRUGARH- 786003 3:G S T COUNCIL 5TH FLOOR TOWER-II
Page No.# 2/3 JEEVAN BHARTI BUILDING JANAPATH ROAD CONNAUGHT PLACE NEW DELHI- 110001 4:GOODS AND SERVICE TAX NETWORK EAST WING WORLD MARK-1 AEROCITY NEW DELHI 5:CENTRAL BOAR
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 Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.