Page 101 - GSTL_2nd July 2020 _Vol 38_Part 1

2020 ] BRAND EQUITY TREATIES LTD. v. UNION OF INDIA 19
ance Redressal Committee were also brought to the notice of the GST Council
and the matter was deliberated upon. Several cases got settled at the government
level, however some cases were contested on the ground that taxpayers did not
put forward any evidence to suggest that they faced any technical glitch on the
portal that prevented them to submit the GST TRAN-1 Form within the pre-
scribed time limit. Many such matters travelled to Courts. Majority of them were
allowed in favour of the taxpayers, and directions were issued to the respondents
to permit the filing of TRAN-1 Form beyond the extended date. Some cases
where such reliefs have been granted by this Court are M/s. Blue Bird Pure Pvt.
Limited v. Union of India - 2019 SCC OnLine 9250 = 2019 (29) G.S.T.L. 660 (Del.);
SARE Realty Projects Pvt. Limited v. Union of India [W.P. (C) 1300/2018, decided
on 1st August, 2018] [2018 (16) G.S.T.L. 177 (Del.)], Bhargava Motors v. Union of
India [W.P. (C) 1280/2019, decision dated 13th May, 2019] [2019 (26) G.S.T.L. 164
(Del.)]; Kusum Enterprises Pvt. Limited v. Union of India [W.P. (C) 7423/2019, de-
cided on 12th July, 2019]. It would also be worthwhile to note that in this period,
the government also acknowledged that on account of technical difficulties, the
taxpayers were indeed unable to file the statutory form within time and CBIC
vide notifications issued from time to time, extended the date prescribed for fil-
ing of Form GST TRAN-1 under Rule 117(1A) of the CGST Rules. This period, as
on date, is being extended by various notifications. Notably, vide Notification
48/2018-C.T., dated 10th September, 2018, the government inserted sub-rule (1A)
to Rule 117, whereby, on the recommendation of the Council, it is now permissi-
ble for the Commissioner to extend the date for submitting the declaration elec-
tronically in Form GST TRAN-1, by a further period in respect of registered per-
sons who could not submit the said declaration by the due date on account of
technical difficulties on the common portal and in respect of whom the Council
has made a recommendation for such extension. The said sub-rule, reads as un-
der :
“[(1A) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), the Commis-
sioner may, on the recommendations of the Council, extend the date for
submitting the declaration electronically in FORM GST TRAN-1 by a fur-
ther period not beyond [21st December, 2019], in respect of registered per-
sons who could not submit the said declaration by the due date on account
of technical difficulties on the common portal and in respect of whom the
Council has made a recommendation for such extension.”]
The insertion of sub-rule 1(A) and, thereafter, extensions being granted for filing
of GST TRAN-1, notwithstanding the period envisaged under sub-rule (1) of
Rule 117, demonstrates that the respondents recognize the fact that the registered
persons were not able to upload GST TRAN-1 due to technical difficulties on the
common portal. This also substantiates that the period for filing the TRAN-1 is
not considered - either by the legislature, or the executive as sacrosanct or man-
datory.
15. In the above factual background, in some of the cases that came up
before this Court, the petitioners cited difficulties in filing the TRAN-1 Form
which were of a different nature. In some cases, there were bona fide errors on the
part of the taxpayer and in others, the difficulty arose on account of lack of un-
derstanding of the complete overhaul of the indirect tax system; or complicated
filing procedure and the statutory forms resulting in erroneous information be-

GST LAW TIMES  2nd July 2020  101