Rathi Iron & Steel Industries Ltd. v. Union of India through Minister of Finance & Ors
[Citation -2020-LL-0312-76]

Citation 2020-LL-0312-76
Appellant Name Rathi Iron & Steel Industries Ltd.
Respondent Name Union of India through Minister of Finance & Ors.
Court HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
Relevant Act CGST
Date of Order 12/03/2020
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags legitimate claim • technical error • statutory form • cenvat credit


1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH W.P. No.1506/2020 (M/s. Rathi Iron & Steel Industries Ltd., vs. Union of India through Minister of Finance & Ors. ) Indore, Dated:12/03/2020 Shri Sumit Nema, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Piyush Parashar, learned counsel for petitioner. Shri Abhishek Tugnawat, learned counsel for Union of India. Shri Prasanna Prasad, learned counsel for respondent nos. 1,3 &5. petitioner before this Court has filed present petition being aggrieved by communication dated 22/11/2019, issued by Office of Commissioner, Central Goods Service Tax and Central Excise through Additional Commissioner (Tech.) GST & Central Excise, Head Quarters Ujjain, wherein respondent no.9 by referring to minutes of meeting of 7th ITGRC, held on 03/04/2018 has disallowed legitimate and rightful un-availed CENVAT credit on Input services, Inputs and on Capital Goods pertaining to time period preceding introduction of GST Act, 2017 to GST Electronic Credit Ledger of petitioner company's GST Portal as transitional credit on ground that case of petitioner does not fall under category of technical error, thus petitioner is not eligible for CENVAT credit on Capital Goods pertaining to time period preceding introduction of GST Act, 2017. petitioner has further stated that petitioner, in fact, has committed mistake due to technical/system error and has failed in filing /uploading declaration electronically Digitally signed by Sumati Jagadeesan Date: 19/03/2020 15:49:48 2 in Form GST Tran-1, in fact, one of column was not filed by petitioner. 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 present writ petition also deserves to be allowed. He has also stated that even SLP preferred in matter has been dismissed. High Court of Punbaj and Haryana, in 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 series of cases has expressed similar view as by Gujrat High Court. In its recent judgment in 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, direction is issued to Respondents to permit Petitioner to either submit TRAN-1 form electronically by opening electronic portal for that purpose or allow Petitioner to tender said form manually on or before 15th October, 2019 and thereafter, process Petitioner's claim for ITC in accordance with law. petition is disposed of in 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 cited judgment by Revenue of Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in Willowood Chemicals case (Supra) as Gujrat High Court itself in subsequent judgments and Delhi High Court in number of judgments (as noticed hereinabove) have permitted petitioners (therein) to file TRAN-I Forms even after 27.12.2017. We also find that Sub Rule (1A) added/inserted to Rule 117 w.e.f. 10.09.2018 has not been noticed in said cited judgment by Revenue, which goes to roots of findings recorded by Hon'ble Gujrat High Court. Thus all petitions deserve to Digitally signed by Sumati Jagadeesan Date: 19/03/2020 15:49:48 3 succeed and are hereby allowed. SLP preferred in matter has also been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. order dated 28/02/2020 passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No.4408/2020 (Union of India & Ors. vs. Adfert Technologies Pvt. Ltd., ) is as under:- In facts and circumstances of present case, we are not inclined to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 136 of Constitution. We accordingly, dismiss Special Leave Petition. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of In light of aforesaid judgment as similar view has been taken by all other High Courts, petitioner is permitted to file or revise their already filed incorrect statutory form TRAN-1 either electronically or manually within period of 45 days from today. respondents shall be at liberty to verify genuineness of claim of petitioner. However, petitioner shall not be denied of their legitimate claim of CENVAT/ITC on ground of non filing of TRAN-1 by 27/12/2017. In present case there is additional prayer made by petitioner and petitioner's contention is that he has filed writ petition against disallowance of legitimate and rightful unclaimed availed CENVAT credit on capital goods pertaining to time period preceding to introduction of Goods and Service Tax Act, to GST Electronic Credit Ledger of petitioner's company under Section 140 of Central Excise and Service Tax Act, 2017. prayer has been made for restraining respondents from canceling GST registration. As this Court has allowed this writ petition, respondent shall not cancel GST Digitally signed by Sumati Jagadeesan Date: 19/03/2020 15:49:48 4 registration of petitioner. respondent shall be free to take appropriate action in accordance with law after permitting petitioner to remove technical glitch (omission while uploading information on GST Board) With aforesaid, W.P. No.1506/2020 stands allowed. (S.C. Sharma) (Shailendra Shukla) Judge Judge sumathi Digitally signed by Sumati Jagadeesan Date: 19/03/2020 15:49:48 Rathi Iron & Steel Industries Ltd. v. Union of India through Minister of Finance & Or
Report Error