Tara Exports Versus The Union of India, Goods and Service Tax Council, The Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, The Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, The Assistant Commissioner (ST) , The Central GST Officer And The Assistant Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise – 2018 (9) TMI 1474 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 321 (Mad.) – Unable to file TRAN 1 electronically – transitional credit – transition to GST Regime – petition could not file returns despite genuine efforts – Held that:- GST is a new progressive levy. One of the progressive ideal of GST is to avoid cascading taxes. GST Laws contemplate seamless flow of tax credits on all eligible inputs. The input tax credits in TRAN 1 are the credits legitimately accrued in the GST transition. The due date contemplated under the laws to claim the transitional credit is procedural in nature – the petitioner has made genuine efforts for filing returns not only through online but also manually, thi
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
ved by the petitioner. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the materials placed on record. 3. The petitioner-Company, which is an importer, a processor of cashew nuts, a trader, exporter of cashew kernels and a dealer under the fifth respondent, had attempted to file GST TRAN-1 form in GSTN portal to avail transitional credit upon the implementation of GST. But, according to the petitioner, due to technical glitches in the portal, they could not complete the filing process within the statutory due date ie. before 27.12.2017. Therefore, according to the petitioner, they had tried the grievance redressal portal, but, all the efforts made by the petitioner have ended in vain. In the meantime, the petitioner has filed the TRAN 1 form, manually, on 31.01.2018, before the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Tirunelveli. However, the same was returned with a direction to contact the Help Desk, with a remark that the returns can only be
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
he following decisions of several High Courts: i) judgment of the Allahabad High Court, in the decision reported in 2018 (10) G.S.T.L. 423 (AIL), in the case of Continental India Private Ltd., v. Union of India; ii) judgment of the Bombay High Court, in WP(L)No.2230 of 2018, in the case of Abicor and Binzel Technoweld Private Ltd., v. The Union of India and Anr, dated 06.02.2018; iii) Order of the Chhattisgarh High Court, in WP(T)No.68 of 2018, in the case of M/s.Dhamtari Krishi Kendra v. Union of India and others, dated 14.05.2018; iv) Order of the Delhi High Court, in WP(C)No.1300 of 2018, etc., batch, dated 09.04.2018; v) Order of the Kerala High Court in WP(C)No.17348 of 2018, dated 14.06.2018, in the case of E.V.Radha Krishna Kurup v. Union of India and others; and vi) Order of this Court in WP.No.18794 of 2018, dated 24.07.2018, in the case of M/s.Calibre Industries v. The Principal Commissioner, GST and Central Excise, Chennai and others. 6. On a perusal of the judgments / order
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
e of the progressive ideal of GST is to avoid cascading taxes. GST Laws contemplate seamless flow of tax credits on all eligible inputs. The input tax credits in TRAN 1 are the credits legitimately accrued in the GST transition. The due date contemplated under the laws to claim the transitional credit is procedural in nature. In view of the GST regime and the IT platform being new, it may not be justifiable to expect the users to back up digital evidences. Even under the old taxation laws, it is a settled legal position that substantive input credits cannot be denied or altered on account of procedural grounds. 9. In view of the foregoing discussions and also considering the special circumstances of the case that the petitioner has made genuine efforts for filing returns not only through online but also manually, this Court is of the view that the petitioner may be granted the relief as prayed for. 10. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, with a direction to the respondents
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =