Siddharth Enterprises VS Nodal Officer

The provided text outlines a legal scenario where multiple writ applications, addressing similar issues, are being collectively addressed through a common judgment and order. The Attorney General for the respondents waives the service of notice for the rules returnable in all the writ applications.

The lead matter, Special Civil Application No. 5758 of 2019, involves a partnership firm filing a writ application under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The firm seeks relief in the form of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ to allow the filing of declarations in GST Tran-1 and GST Tran-2. These declarations are crucial for claiming transitional credit of eligible duties concerning inputs held in stock on the appointed day as per Section 140(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Additionally, the writ applicant requests a writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ for establishing the due date specified under Rule 117 of the CGST Rules to claim transitional credit. This matter is significant as it pertains to the entitlement of transitional credits under GST laws, which could have financial implications for the petitioners.

The court is tasked with considering these writ applications collectively and issuing a comprehensive judgment and order to address the concerns raised therein.

A series of writ applications, all addressing similar concerns, have been consolidated for simultaneous consideration and resolution. The learned Assistant Government Pleader (AGP) has waived the service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents. Special Civil Application No. 5758 of 2019 is treated as the primary case. In this application under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, a partnership firm requests relief in several aspects:

1. Permission to file declarations in GST Tran-1 and GST Tran-2 to claim transitional credit of eligible duties on inputs held in stock on the appointed day, as per Section 140(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

2. Declaration of the due date specified in Rule 117 of the CGST Rules as procedural and not mandatory, allowing for flexibility in claiming transitional credit.

3. Grant of interim relief concerning the aforementioned prayers.

4. Costs incurred in pursuing the application.

5. Any other relief deemed suitable by the Hon’ble Court.

The petitioner, a partnership firm based in Bharuch, Gujarat, is engaged in import-export and the distribution of branded housewares, holding registration under the CGST Act with GSTIN24ABJFS7809M1ZL.

The crux of the matter lies in the petitioner’s quest to claim transitional credit under Section 140(3) of the CGST Act by filing declarations in the prescribed forms, namely GST Tran-1 and GST Tran-2. This right is rooted in Rule 117 of the CGST Rules. The petitioner seeks legal recourse to ensure their eligibility for this transitional credit.

The applications collectively address the interpretation and application of statutory provisions governing transitional credits under the GST regime. The court’s judgment will likely set a precedent regarding the procedural aspects and entitlements related to transitional credits, impacting not only the petitioners but also businesses navigating the GST framework nationwide.

The court heard several writ applications that raised similar issues and decided to address them together. These applications sought relief under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, particularly regarding the filing of declarations in forms GST Tran-1 and GST Tran-2, enabling the claim of transitional credit for eligible duties on stock held on the appointed day under Section 140(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, along with the interpretation of Rule 117 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.

The lead matter, Special Civil Application No. 5758 of 2019, was filed by a partnership firm based in Bharuch, Gujarat, engaged in import-export and distribution of branded housewares, registered under the CGST Act with GSTIN24ABJFS7809M1ZL. The firm sought various reliefs, including mandamus to allow filing of declarations and a declaration regarding the due date for claiming transitional credit under Rule 117.

The applicants contended that they encountered technical glitches and poor net connectivity on the common portal, preventing them from filing the required forms within the stipulated time frame. They argued that the due date prescribed by Rule 117 should be considered procedural rather than mandatory, allowing for flexibility in its enforcement.

Representing the writ-applicants, counsel Mr. Shraff, along with Mr. Dave, emphasized the intent behind the transition from the Central Excise regime to the Goods and Services Tax regime, which aimed to prevent double taxation on the same goods. They asserted that the transitional credit was permissible to avoid such double taxation, highlighting the government’s intention not to collect tax twice on the same goods.

Given the technical challenges faced by the applicants in filing the required forms within the deadline, they resorted to physically lodging their claims for transitional credit. Their argument centered on the necessity for flexibility in adhering to the prescribed timeline, considering the unforeseen technical impediments.

The court considered these submissions and observed the importance of transitional provisions in ensuring a smooth transition from the previous tax regime to the GST regime. It acknowledged the challenges faced by taxpayers due to technical issues on the GST portal and the consequent impact on their ability to claim transitional credits within the prescribed timeframe.

After thorough deliberation, the court rendered its judgment, which likely addressed the legal interpretation of Rule 117 and provided relief to the writ-applicants, possibly in the form of extending the deadline for filing transitional credit declarations or deeming the due date as procedural rather than mandatory. The judgment likely aimed to strike a balance between upholding procedural requirements and accommodating genuine challenges faced by taxpayers during the transition period.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case Law: