The petitioner before this Court has filed the present petition being aggrieved by communication dated 22/11/2019, issued by the Office of Commissioner, Central Goods Service Tax and Central Excise through Additional Commissioner (Tech.) GST & Central Excise, Head Quarters Ujjain, wherein the respondent no.9 by referring to the minutes of the meeting of 7th ITGRC, held on 03/04/2018 has disallowed the legitimate and rightful un-availed CENVAT credit on Input services, Inputs and on Capital Goods pertaining to the time period preceding the introduction of GST Act, 2017 to the GST Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner company’s GST Portal as transitional credit on the ground that the case of the petitioner does not fall under the category of technical error, thus the petitioner is not eligible for CENVAT credit on Capital Goods pertaining to the time period preceding the introduction of GST Act, 2017.
The petitioner has further stated that the petitioner, in fact, has committed mistake due to technical/system error and has failed in filing /uploading a declaration electronically in Form GST Tran-1, in fact, one of the column was not filed by the petitioner.
The petitioner’s contention is that in similar circumstances large number of writ petitions have been allowed by Punjab, Haryana, Delhi, Gujarat and Karnataka High Courts and therefore the present writ petition also deserves to be allowed. He has also stated that even the SLP preferred in the matter has been dismissed.
The High Court of Punbaj and Haryana, in the case of Adfret Techonolgies (P.) Ltd., vs. Union Of India, (2019) 111 Taxman.com 27 (Punjab & Haryana) in paragraph 11 & 12 has held as under:-
“11. Delhi High Court in a series of cases has expressed similar view as by Gujrat High Court. In its recent judgment in the case of Krish Authomotors Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI and others 2019- TIOL-2153-HC-DEL- GST, Delhi High Court has noted its various previous orders and directed as under:
11. Accordingly, a direction is issued to the Respondents to permit the Petitioner to either submit the TRAN-1 form electronically by opening the electronic portal for that purpose or allow the Petitioner to tender said form manually on or before 15th October, 2019 and thereafter, process the Petitioner’s claim for ITC in accordance with law. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.
12. We fully agree with findings of Hon’ble Gujrat and Delhi High Court noticed hereinabove and find no reason to take any contrary view. We are not in agreement with the cited judgment by the Revenue of Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in Willowood Chemicals case (Supra) as the Gujrat High Court itself in subsequent judgments and Delhi High Court in a number of judgments (as noticed hereinabove) have permitted petitioners (therein) to file TRAN-I Forms even after 27.12.2017. We also find that the Sub Rule (1A) added/inserted to Rule 117 w.e.f. 10.09.2018 has not been noticed in the said cited judgment by the Revenue, which goes to the roots of findings recorded by the Hon’ble Gujrat High Court. Thus all the petitions deserve to succeed and are hereby allowed.”
The SLP preferred in the matter has also been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The order dated 28/02/2020 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.4408/2020 (Union of India & Ors. vs. Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd., ) is as under:-
“ In the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are not inclined to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. We accordingly, dismiss the Special Leave Petition. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of ”
In the light of the aforesaid judgment as a similar view has been taken by all other High Courts, the petitioner is permitted to file or revise their already filed incorrect statutory form TRAN-1 either electronically or manually within a period of 45 days from today.
The respondents shall be at liberty to verify the genuineness of the claim of the petitioner. However, the petitioner shall not be denied of their legitimate claim of CENVAT/ITC on the ground of non filing of TRAN-1 by 27/12/2017.
In the present case there is an additional prayer made by the petitioner and the petitioner’s contention is that he has filed a writ petition against disallowance of the legitimate and rightful unclaimed availed CENVAT credit on capital goods pertaining to the time period preceding to the introduction of Goods and Service Tax Act, to the GST Electronic Credit Ledger of the petitioner’s company under Section 140 of Central Excise and Service Tax Act, 2017. A prayer has been made for restraining the respondents from canceling the GST registration. As this Court has allowed this writ petition, the respondent shall not cancel the GST registration of the petitioner. The respondent shall be free to take appropriate action in accordance with law after permitting the petitioner to remove the technical glitch (omission while uploading the information on GST Board)
With the aforesaid, W.P. No.1506/2020 stands allowed.