Case Law Details
M/s Blue Bird Pure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors. (Delhi High Court)
In the present case, the Court is satisfied that, although the failure was on the part of the Petitioner to fill up the data concerning its stock in Column 7(d) of Form TRAN-1instead of Column 7(a), the error was inadvertent. The Respondents ought to have provided in the system itself a facility for rectification of such errors which are clearly bona fide. It should be noted at this stage that although the system provided for revision of a return, the deadline for making the revision coincided with the last date for filing the return i.e. 27th December, 2017. Thus, such facility was rendered impractical and meaningless.
The Court also notes with some concern that the representations repeatedly made by the Petitioner were not attended to by the Respondents which resulted in the Petitioner having to approach this Court for relief. The apprehension of the Respondents that orders of the kind in Bhargava Motors (supra) and Kusum Enterprises (supra) can open the ‘flood gates’ can easily be allayed by the Respondents themselves if they provide a robust Grievance Redressal Mechanism that can address such genuine grievances of the traders instead of compelling every trader to approach this Court for relief.
Harpreet Singh, learned counsel for the Respondents 2 and 3 informs the Court that there is in fact, an Information Technology Grievances Redressal Committee (ITGRC) to address the technical glitches encountered by the traders and to enable them to avail of the input tax and other credit which they are entitled to under the law. When enquired why the said ITGRC was unable to redress the Petitioner’s complaint, Mr. Harpreet Singh speculated that the Petitioner’s case perhaps did not fall within the ‘parameters’ for consideration of the grievance by the said ITGRC. There is nothing on record to suggest that the Petitioner’s repeated representations were ever placed before the ITGRC for its consideration. Even the counter affidavit filed in the present case does not suggest so.
Accordingly, this Court directs the Respondents to either open the online portal so as to enable the Petitioner to again file the rectified TRAN-I Form electronically or accept the manually filed TRAN-I Form with the correction on or before 31st July, 2019.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Congratulations to the petitioner for winning this most eligible case. There many many more such dealers who are deprived of their right to get Tran1 credit. This justice has lit up ray of hope for sufferers like us on this journey in the dark…. where there is no window or door to knock. I am surprised that Department is still not following the Courts decision. We too had submitted application before 31st March 19 for same issue. But till today no response.
Finance ministry is harassing the bonafide tax payers of GST. late fee of return filling is not justified which is challenged by large number of people in high courts in our country. the ministry of finance is only interested to achieve the target of revenue collection which is resulting so many types of late fees/penalty etc. Even FM is not respecting the directions of law of courts.however i think it bad in eyes of Law
Finance ministry is harassing the bonafide tax payers of GST. late fee of return filling is not justified which is challenged by large number of people in high courts in our country. the ministry of finance is only interested to achieve the target of revenue collection which is resulting so many types of late fees/penalty etc. Even FM is not respecting the directions of law of courts.however i think it bad in eyes of Law