Page 51 - GSTL_23rd April 2020_Vol 35_Part 4

2020 ] SHREE MOTORS v. UNION OF INDIA 377
with the assessee on the day immediately preceding 1-7-2017, which inter alia,
imposed time-limit of 90 days (further extended by 90 days) for taking credit of
eligible duties in electronic credit ledger.
4. It is alleged that due to various technical glitches/system error the
petitioners have failed to file Form GST Tran-1 at common portal within the time
envisaged under Rule 117 of the CGST Rules. After attempting help at the GST
network portal, the petitioners approached the department for manually accept-
ing the Form GST Tran-1 and made several attempts in this regard. However, the
same were not responded.
5. The petitioner M/s. Shree Motors assailed validity of Rule 117 of the
CGST Rules by filing S.B.C.W.P. No. 4315/2019, however, the same was declared
intra vires by this Court and the issue raised pertaining to technical glitches was
referred to Single Judge for adjudication.
6. The writ petition came to be decided by Learned Single Judge by or-
der dated 21-11-2019 (Annexure-13), wherein, following the judgment in the case
of Jodhpur Truck Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. : S.B.C.W.P. No. 15221/2019,
decided on 1-11-2019 [2020 (32) G.S.T.L. 172 (Raj.)], the petition was disposed of,
wherein the petitioner was directed to file detailed representation to GST Council
in terms of Rule 117(1A) of the CGST Rules and the GST Council was directed to
dispose of the representation in a time bound manner with a speaking order.
7. In S.B.C.W.P. No. 266/2020 also, a similar direction was issued on
21-11-2019.
8. Pursuant to the directions dated 21-11-2019 the petitioners filed their
representation to the GST Council with a prayer to allow online filing of Form
GST Tran-1, however, the representation filed by the petitioner in S.B.C.W.P. No.
440/2010 was decided by the GST Council (Annexure-15) with the observations
that the case was put up at the ITGRC meeting held on 2-12-2019 and it was ob-
served that petitioner’s case falls under the category ‘B-1’ i.e. cases where the
taxpayer received the error ‘As per GST system log, there are no evidence of er-
ror or submissions/filing of TR.AN- 1’. The petitioner was further directed that
the credit of GST TRAN-1 taken by the petitioner on the basis of interim order be
reversed with applicable interest.
9. Similarly in S.B.C.W.P. No. 266/2020 identical communication (An-
nexure-10) was sent and along with letters copies of the communication received
from the Joint Secretary, GST Council were annexed.
10. It is, inter alia, submitted by counsel for the petitioners that the ac-
tion of the respondents in denying the credit to the petitioners, entitlement
whereof is not in dispute, only on account of the fact that due to technical glitch-
es the petitioners could not file the requisite Form GST Tran-1 in the window
provided by the Rule 117 of the CGST Rules, is not justified.
11. It was submitted that the respondents without taking into consider-
ation the submissions made in this regard as well as various judgments of vari-
ous High Courts directing grant of credit, have rejected the representation made
by the petitioners, pursuant to the directions given by this Court that also based
on the determination made prior to the order passed by this Court.
12. Further submissions were made that the petitioners have vested
right to seek credit once the duties for taxes have been paid by the petitioners.
GST LAW TIMES  23rd April 2020  171