Madras HC directed authorities to allow filing of revised Form GST TRAN-1 by opening portal

Case Details: Bharat Electronics Ltd. v. Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, Chennai - [2021] 130 taxmann.com 368 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Dr. Anita Sumanth, J.
  • G. Shivadoss and Muthu Venkataraman for the Petitioner. V. Sundareswaran, Sr. Panel Counsel for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was a public sector undertaking established to meet requirements of specialized electronic equipment of the Indian Defence Forces. It filed TRAN-1 Form and it was uploaded on 30-10-2017 containing all required details, including details pertaining to eligible ITC. The petitioner noticed that the figure reflected in column no. 6 was erroneous and sought to correct the same. The request was not accepted and it claimed credit in GSTR-3B.

It submitted an explanation by way of communication addressed to the department setting out the background in which Form GSTR 3B had come to be filed reflecting the entire admissible credit which was not filed in TRAN-1. The department issued order stating that credit taken in GSTR-3B cannot be considered as eligible credit. It filed writ petition seeking relief.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court observed that there have been multiple difficulties, both technical and otherwise, that have been faced by assesses and the Department post introduction of GST with effect from 1-7-2017. In such a situation where there was a bonafide human error as in the present case, it should be permitted to be rectified. There was no dispute expressed by the department in its counters on the position that the error committed was inadvertent. Therefore, the Court directed to enable the filing of revised Form TRAN-1 by opening of the portal.

List of Cases Referred to

• • Aagman Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2019] 111 taxmann.com 462/[2020] 77 GST 530 (Delhi) (para 10)
  • Carlstahl Craftsman Enterprises (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2021] 127 taxmann.com 885 (Mad.) (para 10)
  • Ram Autho v. CCT&CE [W.P (MD) No. 15531 of 2020, dated 16-2-2021] (para 10)
  • Union of India v. Asiad Paints Ltd. [W.A No. 18 of 2020, dated 23-2-2021] (para 10)
  • Super India Paper Products v. Union of India [2021] 127 taxmann.com 602 (Delhi) (para 10)
  • Brand Equity Treaties Ltd. v. Union of India [2020] 116 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi) (para 11)
  • Amplexor India (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2020] 118 taxmann.com 445 (Mad.) (para 13).