TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 780X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mn 7B of the prescribed form. On 7th March 2018, a notification was issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs by which the Central Goods and Services Tax (Second Amendment) Rules, 2018 were published which enabled a registered person to submit a statement in Form GST TRAN-2 by 31st March 2018 or within such extended period as may be decided by the Commissioner. Accordingly, the first respondent attempted to file TRAN-2 which could not be filed due to an error generated as a result of the failure of the first respondent to incorporate the quantity of goods held in stock in Column 7B of Form GST TRAN-1. There is no dispute that there was a bona fide mistake committed by the first respondent while filling Form GST TRAN-1 in early da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent filed its Form GST TRAN-1. On the same day, the form wasamended by the first respondent. However, the first respondent did not mention the quantity of the goods held in stock in Column 7B of Form GST TRAN-1. Though Rule 117 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (for short CGST Rules ) which prescribed filing of Form GST TRAN-2 came into force on 28th June 2017, a notification was issued on 7th March 2018 by which sub-rule (4) of Rule 117 of CGST Rules was amended. The amendment permitted submission of a statement in Form GST TRAN-2 by 31st March 2018 or within such period as may be extended by the Commissioner on the recommendation of GST Council for each of six tax periods. 3. The case of the first respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns made by the learned Single Judge at paragraph 7 may not be correct. His submission is that after the time prescribed by law for filing Form GST TRAN-2 has expired, the learned single Judge has virtually issued a direction to the fifth appellant to ensure that the first respondent is in a position to file Form GST TRAN-2. The learned counsel relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India and Another v. Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd. (1996)4 SCC 453. He submitted that in exercise of the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, such a direction which is contrary to the statutory provisions cannot be issued by the High Court. He submitted that though there are similar direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TRAN-1. There is no dispute that there was a bona fide mistake committed by the first respondent while filling Form GST TRAN-1 in early days of GST regime. Even the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants accepted that there are several decisions of various High Courts taking a similar view as the learned Single Judge has taken. On a query made by the Court, he informed the Court that so far the Apex Court has not interfered with any of the orders passed by various High Courts. 7.We have referred to the decisions relied upon by the first respondent including the decision of a Division Bench of Delhi High Court in the case of M/s. Blue Bird Pure Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and Others in W.P.(C) No.3798/2019. It is th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertently not filled in Form GST TRAN-1. The Form GST TRAN-1 was filed within the time stipulated by law. The learned Single Judge and the various High Courts have passed orders granting permission to either submit Form GST TRAN-1 electronically by opening the online portal for that purposes or allowing the petitioner to tender form manually on or before 15th October 2019. This was done as the Form GST TRAN-2 could not be filed as there was an inadvertent omission in one column by failing to mention the quantity of goods held in stock. Therefore, we do not find that any illegality has been committed by the learned Single Judge while passing the impugned order. It cannot be said that the order of the learned Single Judge and especially the ob ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
