Case tittle | Abhi Mobile House VS The Union of India |
Court | Punjab and Haryana High Court |
Honourable Judge | Justice Jaswant Singh Justice Sant Parkash |
Citation | 2022 (12) GSTPanacea 655 HC Punjab and Haryana Cwp 36445/2019 |
Judgment Date | 16-December-2022 |
The petitioner in this case is a proprietorship business engaged in the sale and purchase of mobile phones. It is registered under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act of 2017. Before the implementation of the GST Act, the business was registered under the Punjab VAT Act and also under the Central Sales Tax Act of 1956. This transition underscores its compliance with evolving tax regulations in India, moving from state-level VAT to the unified GST framework introduced in 2017. The petitioner’s activities highlight the adaptation required of businesses to new tax regimes aimed at simplifying taxation and fostering a unified market across the country.
The petitioner in this case is a proprietorship firm engaged in the sale and purchase of mobile phones. It has been registered under various taxation statutes, including the Goods and Service Tax Act of 2017, and previously under the Punjab VAT Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.
The petitioner’s grievance stems from its inability to upload details of un-utilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) from its accounting books onto the electronically generated statutory Form “TRAN-I.” Under the GST regime, this form was crucial for businesses to claim the benefit of previously accrued un-utilized ITC from earlier taxing statutes.
Due to this inability to upload the necessary details onto Form TRAN-I, the petitioner claims it has been unfairly deprived of the opportunity to utilize the accumulated ITC, which could have been beneficial for offsetting future tax liabilities under the GST system.
The petitioner likely argues that this omission has caused financial hardship and is seeking redressal, possibly through a legal or administrative process, to rectify the situation and avail the rightful benefits under the GST framework. This case underscores the challenges businesses face during the transition period to new tax regimes and the importance of procedural compliance in accessing statutory benefits. resolved in favor of the petitioner based on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Brand Equities Shares vs. Union of India, where it was held that any difficulty faced by the assessee in uploading details under TRAN-I due to technical glitches or system issues should not prejudice their rights to claim transitional credits. The petitioner’s contention was that due to technical difficulties on the GSTN portal, they were unable to upload details of un-utilized Input Tax Credit accrued under previous tax regimes into the transitional form TRAN-I within the stipulated time frame. Despite repeated attempts and representations, the system did not allow them to complete the upload. Consequently, the petitioner sought relief, arguing that they should not be deprived of the benefit of transitional credits merely due to technical failures beyond their control. The court noted that such technical issues indeed existed during the relevant period and that the intent of the law was to enable smooth transition and not to penalize taxpayers for technical deficiencies of the GSTN portal. Therefore, the court directed the concerned authorities to allow the petitioner to upload the requisite details on TRAN-I and to grant them the corresponding Input Tax Credit as per their accounts. This decision underscores the importance of protecting taxpayer rights in the face of administrative challenges in the implementation of tax laws under the GST regime.
The petitioner, a proprietorship engaged in the sale and purchase of Mobile Phones, operates under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, having previously been registered under the Punjab VAT Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Their grievance pertains to their inability to upload details of un-utilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) from their accounting books onto the electronic Form “TRAN-I” as required under the GST regime. This form was crucial for claiming benefits associated with previously accrued un-utilized ITC under earlier tax statutes.
The petitioner’s counsel argues that a similar issue was resolved in favor of taxpayers by a previous judgment dated November 4, 2019, in CWP 30949 of 2018 titled “Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India and others.” They contend that based on this precedent, the petitioner should also receive relief under similar terms.
In essence, the petitioner seeks judicial intervention to rectify the situation where they were unable to avail themselves of the benefits related to their accumulated un-utilized ITC due to procedural limitations in the GST framework, despite compliance efforts aligned with prior tax statutes. This case underscores the ongoing challenges and adjustments faced by businesses transitioning under the GST regime in India.
The petitioner, a proprietorship engaged in the sale and purchase of Mobile Phones, operates under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, having previously been registered under the Punjab VAT Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Their grievance pertains to their inability to upload details of un-utilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) from their accounting records onto the statutory Form “TRAN-I” under the GST regime. This form was crucial for claiming the benefit of previously accrued un-utilized ITC under the previous tax statutes.
The petitioner argues that their case is similar to a precedent set by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the judgment dated 4th November 2019, in the case of “Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India and others,” which ruled in favor of the taxpayers regarding the issue of un-utilized ITC under GST.
During the proceedings, Mr. Sunish Bindlish, representing the respondents/revenue, acknowledged that the petitioner’s case aligns with the aforementioned judgment in the Adfert Technologies case. Therefore, he conceded that the present petition should be resolved in accordance with the principles established in that judgment.
In summary, the petitioner seeks relief similar to that granted in the Adfert Technologies case, asserting their entitlement to claim un-utilized ITC under GST regulations. The respondents have accepted the applicability of the earlier court decision to the current petition, suggesting a potential favorable resolution for the petitioner based on precedent.
The petitioner, a proprietorship dealing in the sale and purchase of mobile phones, is registered under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, 2017, having previously been registered under the Punjab VAT Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The grievance of the petitioner arose from its inability to upload details of un-utilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) from its accounting records onto the electronic Form “TRAN-I” as required under the GST regime. This form was crucial for availing benefits of previous un-utilized ITC accrued under earlier tax statutes.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the issue had already been resolved in favor of taxpayers by a previous judgment dated November 4, 2019, in the case titled “Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India and others.” The counsel for the respondents/revenue accepted notice and conceded that the present petition’s issue was identical to the one decided in the Adfert Technologies case.
Consequently, the court allowed the petition in accordance with the judgment in CWP No. 30949 of 2018 dated November 4, 2019, granting the petitioner permission or modification to file Form TRAN-I by December 31, 2019. This decision aligned the petitioner’s case with the precedent set in the Adfert Technologies case, ensuring relief consistent with the interpretation and application of GST provisions concerning un-utilized ITC.
The petitioner, a proprietorship engaged in the sale and purchase of mobile phones, is registered under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act). Before the GST regime, it was also registered under the Punjab VAT Act and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The core issue raised by the petitioner is its inability to upload details of unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) from its accounting records onto the electronically generated statutory Form “TRAN-I” under the GST regime. This form was crucial for claiming the benefit of previously accrued unutilized ITC under the earlier tax statutes.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that a similar issue had been resolved in favor of taxpayers by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a previous judgment dated November 4, 2019, in the case titled “Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union of India and others”. The petitioner sought similar relief based on this precedent.
During the proceedings, Mr. Sunish Bindlish, representing the respondents (Revenue), accepted notice and conceded that the current petition’s issue was directly covered by the aforementioned judgment in the Adfert Technologies case. Consequently, it was agreed that the present petition should be disposed of in accordance with the terms set out in the Adfert Technologies judgment.
As a result, the petition was allowed, and the petitioner was granted permission (or modification) to file the statutory Form TRAN-I by December 31, 2019. The court clarified that if the petitioner faced any hindrance in availing the benefit due to non-opening of the portal by the respondents, the petitioner could alternatively claim the benefit of unutilized credit in their GST-3B forms for January 2020, either electronically or manually.
In summary, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, granting relief based on the precedent established in the Adfert Technologies case, ensuring that the petitioner could appropriately claim the benefit of previously accrued unutilized ITC under the GST regime.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit:
Read Another Case Law:
GST Case law: