{"id":14732,"date":"2018-10-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2018-10-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2018-10-19T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2018-10-18T18:30:00","slug":"indusind-media-communications-ltd-and-anr-versus-union-of-india-through-a-the-joint-secretary-department-of-revenue-ministry-of-finance-and-ors","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/?p=14732","title":{"rendered":"Indusind Media Communications Ltd. And Anr. Versus Union Of India through (a) The Joint Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance And Ors."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Indusind Media Communications Ltd. And Anr. Versus Union Of India through (a) The Joint Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance And Ors.<br \/>GST<br \/>2018 (10) TMI 1617 &#8211; BOMBAY HIGH COURT &#8211; 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 416 (Bom.) , [2019] 61 G S.T.R. 403 (Bom)<br \/>BOMBAY HIGH COURT &#8211; HC<br \/>Dated:- 19-10-2018<br \/>Writ Petition No. 2229 of 2018 <br \/>GST<br \/>M.S. Sanklecha And Riyaz I. Chagla, JJ.<br \/>\nFor the Petitioners : Mr. Vikram Nankani, Senior Counsel with Mr Prithviraj Chaudhary, i\/b Mr. Sharon Patol<br \/>\nFor the Respondents : Mr. Amol Joshi a\/w Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly<br \/>\nORDER :<br \/>\n1. Heard. Rule.<br \/>\n2. On 10th August 2017, Petitioner No. 2 transferred a part of its business i.e. Headend In The Sky (HITS) to Petitioner No. 1. However, as on 1st July 2017 there was Input Credit available to the Petitioner No. 2 from the earlier CENVAT Regime. Thus, the Petitioner No. 2 sought to carry forward its available Input Credit to the GST regime by filing TRANS&shy;1. In its revised TRANS&shy;1 the Petiti<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/caselaws?id=369651\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p>oner No. 2. However, this flow of Input Credit to Petitioner No. 1 from Petitioner No. 2 is not taking place as the Revised TRANS&shy;1 to the extent it shows distribution is not being reflected. This admittedly in view of the technical difficulties as recorded in the Minutes of the second Meeting of Grievance Redressal Committee held on 21st August 2018, where the system is not accepting a downward revision of Input Credit available. As a consequence of the distribution as sought by the Petitioner No. 2 to the various locations\/branches in its revised TRANS&shy;1 not being reflected on the website, the Input Credit cannot be reflected in the GST ledgerat the branches\/locations. Therefore, the branches\/locations are not able to utilise the Input Credit by filing the GSTR&shy;3B. Further it is pointed out that in terms of Section 16(4) of the Act, the last date for taking the input tax credit for the financial year period ending March 2018 would be the 20th October 2018. In case the sam<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/caselaws?id=369651\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p>18 (at the instance of the Petitioner). On 17th October2017,itwasadjournedattherequestofthe Respondents in particular to respond to the case made out by the Petitioners. Today, whenthe Petition reached, the Respondents place reliance upon the earlier Additional Affidavit dated 21st September 2018. It does not deal with the above contention urged by the Petitioners. In fact, on facts and\/or in law at this stage, the Respondents do not dispute that the Petitioners are entitled to distribute the credit in terms of Section 140(8) of the Act nor dispute that it is entitled to and\/or covered by the Assessees&#39; who can file form GSTR&shy;3B, nor that the provisions of Section 16(4) of the Act apply, nor dispute that the last date for filing the GSTR&shy;3B is 20th October 2018 and not doing so would result in the lapse of the credit.<br \/>\n6. In fact the Petitioners location at Delhi had filed a Writ Petition in the Delhi High Court bearing Writ Petition No. C&shy;8691 of 2008 (Indusind Media C<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/caselaws?id=369651\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p>o the final outcome of the Petition.<br \/>\n7. In view of the above, the undisputed position before us is that the Petitioners are entitled to distribute the Input Credit available with it as on 1st July 2017 amongst its branches\/locations. This distribution has not been possible on account of technical problems of the Respondents. Further the availment of input tax credit available on 1st July 2017 has to be done on or before 20th October 2018 in view of Section 16(4) of the Act. Thus, it is likely that the Petitioners may be deprived of the facility of the input tax credit available with it on 1st July 2017, if the same is not taken before 20th October 2018. It is to be noted that the Respondents have extended the time to file TRANS&shy;1 and TRANS&shy;2, but no such extension has been granted to extend the time to file GSTR&shy;3B. Thus, in the above facts, pending the final disposal of the Petition (when these issues will be considered in greater depth), as the system is not accepting it<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/caselaws?id=369651\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Indusind Media Communications Ltd. And Anr. Versus Union Of India through (a) The Joint Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance And Ors.GST2018 (10) TMI 1617 &#8211; BOMBAY HIGH COURT &#8211; 2018 (19) G. S. T. L. 416 (Bom.) , [2019] 61 G S.T.R. 403 (Bom)BOMBAY HIGH COURT &#8211; HCDated:- 19-10-2018Writ Petition No. 2229 of &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/?p=14732\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Indusind Media Communications Ltd. And Anr. Versus Union Of India through (a) The Joint Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance And Ors.&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14732","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14732","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=14732"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14732\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14732"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14732"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14732"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}