M\/s. Anbu Motors, M\/s. Anbu Automobile Versus The Principal Chief Commissioner, Goods and Service Tax Act, Union of India, The Chairman, Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTIN), Government of Tamil Nadu, The State Tax Officer And The Superintendent of GST & Central Excise
GST
2018 (12) TMI 1406 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 1-11-2018
W. P. (MD)Nos. 22010 & 22011 of 2018
GST
Mrs. Justice J. Nisha Banu
\nFor the Petitioner : Mr.S.Karunakar (In both WPs)
\nFor the Respondents : Mr.R.Aravindan, Standing Counsel, Mr.K.Ashokkumar Ram, Mr.D.Muruganantham, Additional Government Pleader
\nCOMMON ORDER
\nThere writ petitions are filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to re-open and reinstate the facility of online submission of TRAN-1, so as to enable the petitioners to file GST TRAN-1.
\n2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 & 3, learned Counsel appearin<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n 39\/13\/2018-GST, to facilitate, among other things, TRAN-1 submission. This circular contemplates appointment of Nodal Officers to facilitate the filing by the struggling TRAN 1 filers. But, the grievance of the petitioners is that so far, no such Nodal Officer is appointed, which is not refuted by the learned Standing Counsel. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n atform 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. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" M\/s. Anbu Motors, M\/s. Anbu Automobile Versus The Principal Chief Commissioner, Goods and Service Tax Act, Union of India, The Chairman, Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTIN), Government of Tamil Nadu, The State Tax Officer And The Superintendent of GST & Central ExciseGST2018 (12) TMI 1406 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMIMADRAS HIGH COURT – … Continue reading “M\/s. Anbu Motors, M\/s. Anbu Automobile Versus The Principal Chief Commissioner, Goods and Service Tax Act, Union of India, The Chairman, Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTIN), Government of Tamil Nadu, The State Tax Officer And The Superintenden”<\/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-15708","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15708","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=15708"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15708\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=15708"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=15708"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=15708"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n5. The learned Counsel for the petitioners relied upon a decision of this Court made in W.P.(MD)No.18532 of 2018, dated 10.09.2018 (in the case of Tara Exports, Rep. by its Partner, Narayan Bharathan v. Union of India, Rep. by Principal Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi and others), wherein, this Court, after discussing various issues and various decisions rendered by various Courts across the Country, has passed the following order:
\n “7. The Circular issued by the Union Government has also recognized that the grievances of the tax paying public are genuine in character and therefore, evolved a structural mechanism to address the grievances of general a<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n 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.
\n 10. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, with a direction to the respondents either to open the portal, so as to enable the petitioner to file the TRAN 1 electronically for claiming the transitional credit or accept the manually filed TRAN 1, dated 31.01.2018, and allow the input credits, after processing the same, if it is otherwise eligible in law. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court has passed the above o<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n