Case Law Details
Nodal Officer Vs GST Council (Gujarat High Court)
While in the case on hand, this Court has not declared the said Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, 2017 neither this Court has ordered the respondents to carry forward CENVAT credit beyond the time limit, but in the case on hand, the respondents herein had tried to upload form GST TRAN-1, but it could not be filed on account of technical glitches in terms of poor network connectivity and other technical difficulties at common portal. Under the circumstances, this Court has gone into the question that in such circumstances what would be the remedy if a person who tries to follow Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, 2017 but, without there being any fault on his side he could not upload the form due to technical glitches. Therefore, this Court has followed the judgement in the case of Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. (supra), wherein, after relying on number of judgements of the Apex Court, the co- ordinate Bench of this Court had followed the consistent findings of the Apex Court and held that the right accrued to the assessee on the date when the paid tax on the raw materials or the inputs and that right would continue by way of CENVAT credit. The CENVAT credit is therefore indefeasible. Following the said principle, this Court had directed the applicants herein – original respondents to permit the respondents herein – original petitioners to allow filing declaration form in GST TRAN-1 and GST TRAN-2, so as to enable them to claim transitional credit of the eligible duties in respect of the inputs held in stock on the appointed day in terms of Section 140(3) of the GST Act.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
1. The present Misc. Civil Applications have been filed by the applicants – original respondents praying for review of the judgement and order dated 06.09.2019 passed by this Court in the main writ applications being the Special Civil Applications Nos. 5758, 5759, 5760 and 5762 of 2019 allowing all the four writ applications on the ground that the same is per incuriam.
2. Since the issues raised in all the captioned Miscellaneous Applications are same, those were heard analogously and are being decided by this common judgement and order.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
