The Madras High Court has recently dismissed the petition filed by the assessee, Sugan Clothing against denial of TRAN-1 amendment.
The petitioner plead for issuance of direction to the Principal Commissioner of GST & CE to allow the Petitioner to File Form GST TRAN-2 to claim input tax credit totaling to Rs.46,491/- on goods held in stock in relation to which invoices/duty paying documents are not available.
The petitioner being an assessee under the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 challenged an order passed by the Joint Commissioner of GST & CE Nungambakkam Division dated 05.03.2020 rejecting the request for amendment of TRAN-1.
The Single Bench of Justice Anita Sumanth observed that, “the petitioner has categorically missed the bus, seeing as the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and another v. Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. and another (SLP (C) Nos.32700 – 32710 of 2018 dated 22.07.2022 has granted a window as a final opportunity for correction of all errors arising from filing of TRAN-1 and 2.”
In July, the Supreme Court had directed to open the GST system enabling taxpayers to claim transitional credit for two months starting from 1st September to 31st October. GSTN, the technical backbone of the GST, had to make changes in the system in order to comply with the directions of the Apex Court and the requirements of the taxpayers.
The guidelines for filing/revising TRAN-1/TRAN-2 were issued earlier pursuant to orders dated 22/07/2022 and 02/09/2022 of the Supreme Court of India in the case of FILCO TRADE CENTRE PVT. LTD vs UNION OF INDIA. The guidelines for verification of GST TRAN-1 and GST TRAN-2 were issued by the authorities subsequently.
In the present case, it was further observed by the Madras High Court that, “The petitioner, being an assessee for the purposes of the Act would/should, no doubt had been aware of all these developments and should have availed of the same in time. Substantial efforts were taken by the Registry of this Court as well as by the revenue authorities in listing those matters that related to amendment of TRAN-1 and 2 during the period when the benefit under the aforesaid judgment was operative, till 30.11.2022.”
It was thus held that, “However, the primary responsibility for the same lies in the hands of the petitioner and as on date it is too late”, confirming the impugned order and dismissing the writ petition. On a positive note, no costs were imposed on the petitioner.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
