The petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities for transferring the credit of a sum of ₹ 25,39,371/- in the petitioner’s electronic credit ledger by permitting the petitioner to resubmit form GST TRAN-2 electronically or manually as permissible and to permit the petitioner to avail such credit for discharging the liabilities under the GST regime.

Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act and is engaged in business of supplying smart phones in the State of Rajasthan. As on 30.06.2017 which is a crucial date for transition from previous Excise regime to GST regime, the petitioner had stock valuation of which was ₹ 9.09 Crores (rounded off) in respect of which the petitioner was entitled to avail the benefit under Section 140 (3) of the CGST Act read with Rules framed under the said Act. For such purpose, the petitioner, as required under the law, filed GST form Tran 1 on 27.12.2017. The petitioner also filed a monthly statement of supplies for the months of July, August and September, 2017 on 14.06.2018 in order to avail the input tax credit of ₹ 25,39,371/-, ₹ 21,413/- and ₹ 347/- for the said months respectively. It is undisputed that petitioner filled up these forms within the statutory time limits. According to the petitioner for some unknown reason, the transitional input tax credit of ₹ 21,413/- and ₹ 347 for the months of August, 2017 and September, 2017 alone were credited in the petitioner’s electronic credit ledger and the input tax credit for the month of July, 2017 amounting to ₹ 25,39,371/- was not credited. On the same date as the date of declarations of such input tax credit i.e. 14.06.2018 the petitioner sent a communication in the form of a complaint to the GST authorities pointing out the error in not transmitting the petitioner’s input tax credit for the month of July, 2017. There was no response from the Department to the said complaint. The petitioner thereupon filed this petition and has prayed for the prayers noted above.

The case of the respondent as emerging from the reply filed in response to the notice issued by the Court is that there was no technical glitch in the system on account of which the said input tax credit claimed by the petitioner has not been reflected in the petitioner’s ledger account. It is stated that proper verification was done and the system shows no sign of technical defects. In short, the stand of the respondent is that whatever the reason for non-reflection of input tax credit in the ledger account of the petitioner, it can be attributed only to the petitioner and none else.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length. In the present petition we are impressed by the petitioner’s argument of no fault on the part of the petitioner in properly uploading the petitioner’s input tax credit for the month of July, 2017. This conclusion we have arrived at on the basis of following circumstances:-

1. The Department does not dispute that the petitioner had made monthly declaration in Tran 2 form for all three months of July, August and September, 2017. This was done on a single date i.e. 14.06.2018. 2. For the months of August and September, 2017, the system showed the input tax credit as declared by the petitioner in the respective Tran-2 forms. 3. On the same day on 14.06.2018 itself the petitioner raised an objection to the Department regarding non-reflection of input tax credit for the month of July, 2017.

Under the circumstances in our view the petitioner cannot be deprived of its rightful tax credit if otherwise available in law. The respondents shall ensure that such declaration of the petitioner is accepted.

Learned counsel for the Government of India however submitted that declaration that the petitioner has made with respect to the available input tax credit would require verification and input tax credit can be availed only when such credit was available in the petitioner’s account. With this suggestion we can have no dispute. However allowing the petitioner to make a declaration is different from verification of the petitioner’s claim. Under the circumstances, this petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to reflect the petitioner’s declaration of input tax credit for the month of July, 2017 of ₹ 25,39,371/-in the ledger account of the petitioner. However the petitioner shall produce necessary documents to establish availability of such input tax credit for the relevant period before the Assistant Commissioner-respondent No.2. It would be open for him to verify such a claim of the petitioner.

With these observations and directions, the petition is disposed of.