Pee Yel Jay International And Other vs. Goods And Service Tax Council And Other
(Madras High Court, Tamilnadu)

Case Law
Petitioner / Applicant
Pee Yel Jay International And Other
Goods And Service Tax Council And Other
Madras High Court
Mar 5, 2021
Order No.
W.P.(MD)Nos.853, 854, 856 & 861 of 2021
TR Citation
2021 (3) TR 4265
Related HSN Chapter/s
Related HSN Code


Heard the learned counsel on either side.

2. The petitioners were the registered dealers under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 under the State Government. Following the implementation of GST Regime on 01.07.2017, the petitioners had to make the necessary migration. It is seen from the materials enclosed in the typed set of papers that they had filed the requisite Form TRAN 1 declarations. Unfortunately, ITC available to them was not reflected in the Electronic Credit Ledger. Therefore, the petitioners have been submitting representation after representation. Unfortunately, the respondents had taken the stand that the petitioners did not even file Form TRAN 1. This response appears to be a stereotyped one and it is running counter to the material enclosed in the record. The petitioners have enclosed the screen shot to show that they had filed the TRAN 1. Their only grievance is that in the Electronic Credit Ledger, ITC has not been carried forward. In any event, well before the cut of date, namely, 31.03.2020, the petitioners have been knocked the doors of the respondents. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to relief. The issue is no longer res integra.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners drew my attention to the decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in W.P.(C) No.3798 of 2019 (M/s. Blue Bird Pure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and Others). In the said case also, the dealer had committed an inadvertent error in showing the available stock of goods in column 7(d) of the Form insetad of 7(a) of the Form. The Hon’ble Division Bench of Delhi High Court held as follows:-

“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”

4.The decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench of Delhi High Court is squarely applicable to the case on hand.

5. Since the petitioners have clearly made out a case for grant of relief, the jurisdictional officer/6th respondent is directed to verify the correctness of the facts projected in the petition mentioned representations dated 20.02.2020 and on being satisfied with the same, forward the petitioners’ case to the Nodal Officer, namely, fifth respondent herein who will coordinate with the first respondent so that the petition mentioned credit amounts filed in Form TRAN 1 are duly carried forward to the petition mentioned Electronic Credit Ledger pertaining to the respective writ petitioners. This exercise shall be carried out and completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. These writ petitions are allowed accordingly. No costs.

  • Home
  • /
  • caselaw
  • /
  • pee yel jay international and other vs goods and service tax council and other madras high court

BUSY is a simple, yet powerful GST / VAT compliant Business Accounting Software that has everything you need to grow your business.

phone Sales & Support:

+91 82 82 82 82 82
+91 11 - 4096 4096