Case Law Details
Eid Parry (India) Limited Vs Union of India (Karnataka High Court)
In this petition the petitioner seeks Writ of Mandamus to respondent Nos.2 and 3 either to open the online portal so as to enable the petitioner to again file the rectified TRAN-I form electronically which was originally filed physically at Annexure-B or to permit the petitioner to manually transition the credit amounting to Rs.4,96,163/- to their Electronic Credit Ledger under the GST regime and for other reliefs.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for respondent No.2 and Sri. Vikram. S. Huilgol, learned counsel for respondent No.3 and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the documents produced by the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prayer ‘B’ sought for in the petition is directly covered by decision of this Court in the case of Union of India vs. Asaid Paints Limited and Ors., reported in (2021) 49 GSTL 256, wherein it is held as under:
52. Therefore, on a careful consideration of the judgments cited by the learned senior counsel and learned counsel for respondents in light of the order impugned, we find that the learned single Judge has been persuaded by the judgment passed in Adfert Technologies in coming to the conclusion that the assessees herein must be granted relief by giving them another opportunity to file/revise TRAN-1 either electronically or manually on or before 31.12.2020. We find that the reasoning of the learned single Judge and the relief granted would not call for any interference except to the extent of extending the time within which they would now have to file TRAN-1. The said time-frame has now expired even after successive extensions on 30.08.2020. Therefore, the respondents-assessees are permitted to file/revise TRAN-1 either electronically or manually on or before 31.03.2021. The revenue is at liberty to verify the genuineness or the merits of the claim in accordance with law.
4. It is therefore, submitted that even this petition deserves to be disposed of in terms of the said decision by issuing appropriate direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3.
5. Per contra learned counsel for respondents while not disputing that the issue in controversy in the present petition is covered by the aforesaid decision submits that direction can be to the respondents to permit the petitioner to file rectified TRAN-I Form electronically or manually within a period of 30 days from today. The said submission of the learned counsel for the respondents is placed on record.
6. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in light of the decision of Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Union of India vs. Asaid Paints Limited and Ors., supra, I am of the considered opinion that present petition also deserves to be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid decision. In the result I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The petition is allowed in terms of the aforesaid decision of Union of India vs. Asaid Paints Limited and Ors.,
ii) The petitioner is permitted to file once again rectified TRAN-I Form electronically or manually within a period of 30 days from today; pursuant to the petitioner filing the said form, respondents would consider and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
