POWER PALAZZO PVT. LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Uchit Sheth, learned advocate for the petitioners, submitted that the respondents do not dispute the fact that the petitioner is entitled to transitional input credit. It was submitted that the Form GST TRAN-?1 was filed by the petitioner within the stipulated time and even that position is not disputed. It was contended that tax credit is a vested right and unless it is established that the petitioner has failed to claim it within the prescribed time, the respondents are not justified in denying the claim for transitional input credit. According to the learned advocate, such cases are required to be decided in a rational manner and the Notification dated 10.09.2018 issued by the Government of India is required to be read in a purposive manner. However, the IT Grievance Redressal Committee has considered only those defined errors showing technical glitch, but has not considered other errors.

(2.) Referring to the minutes of the 4th meeting of IT Grievance Redressal Committee held on 12th February, 2019, it was pointed out that the Committee had categorised the errors on account of technical/system issues and cases where there was no evidence of technical/system issues and has allowed filing of Form GST TRAN-?1 only in those cases where, according to it, there were technical/system issues.

(3.) Reliance was placed upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Eicher Motors Ltd. v. Union of India, 1999 (106) E.L.T. 3 (SC), for the proposition that if on the inputs the assessee had already paid the taxes on the basis that when the goods are utilised in the manufacture of further products as inputs thereto, then the tax on these goods gets adjusted which are finished subsequently. Thus, a right accrued to the assessee on the date when it paid the tax on the raw materials or the inputs and that right would continue until the facility available thereto gets worked out or until those goods existed.