M/S Dhamtari Krishi Kendra vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the Commissioner's order dated September 14, 2018, refusing permission to submit TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 forms, was erroneous and perverse as it failed to consider crucial evidence presented by the petitioner. Specifically, the Commissioner did not refer to the petitioner's complaint dated December 26, 2017, regarding technical glitches, nor the attempts at manual submission and registered post dispatch on January 18, 2018. The Court found prima facie that the Commissioner's finding was incorrect in light of Annexure P/7 and the documents evidencing manual submission. Citing precedents from the Madras and Punjab & Haryana High Courts, the Court concluded that the authorities should have considered the petitioner's contentions regarding technical difficulties. Consequently, the matter was remitted back to the Commissioner for reconsideration and a fresh order, with directions to consider the petitioner's evidence of technical glitches, timely intimation, and manual submission. The Court also noted Section 117(1)A of the GST Law, empowering the GST Council to extend submission dates due to technical difficulties, and suggested the Commissioner could refer the matter to the Council. The Commissioner was directed to decide within 60 days, and the GST Council, if involved, within 90 days.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Dhamtari Krishi Kendra, sought to file GST TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 returns electronically by the extended due date of December 27, 2017. They claim to have encountered technical glitches on the GST web portal and reported this to the authorities on December 26, 2017, receiving a seal and signature of acknowledgement. The petitioner also attempted manual submission on January 18, 2018, and sent the form by registered post, which was allegedly not accepted. A previous writ petition (WPT No. 68 of 2018) was disposed of with a direction to approach the Nodal Officer. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, subsequently refused permission to file the returns on September 14, 2018, citing a lack of evidence of attempts to submit within the stipulated period and ignoring the petitioner's submitted documents.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Commissioner, Commercial Tax, erred in refusing permission to the petitioner to submit GST TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 returns, despite the petitioner providing evidence of technical glitches and attempts at manual submission, contrary to the principles laid down in similar cases like Tara Exports Vs. Union of India and Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Others? Petitioner's arguments: The Commissioner's finding was erroneous and perverse as it failed to consider the factual matrix, including the reported technical glitch on December 26, 2017, the acknowledgement of this report by the department, and the subsequent manual submission and postal dispatch of the forms. Reliance was placed on the judgments of the Madras High Court in Tara Exports and the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Adfert Technologies, which allowed similar claims. Revenue/State's arguments: Not recorded in the judgment.