TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 703X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decided in the case of LANTECH PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, SRIKAKULAM VERSUS THE PRL COMMISSIONER VISAKHAPATNAM [ 2019 (10) TMI 477 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT] where it was held that in the absence of evidence, the re-filing of the form by the petitioner was not allowed. This Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to either open the portal to enable the petitioner to again file the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Section 140 of the CGST and APSGST Act, 2017; or (b) in the alternative permit the petitioner to submit TRAN-1 manually and to direct the respondents to consider TRAN-1 so filed and grant the credit in accordance with the law; or (c) in further alternative, direct the 1st and 6th respondents to grant a refund of VAT credit of ₹ 1,33,77,654/- as shown in the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner could not file the TRAN-1 due to technical glitches and that the petitioner s representations were not considered by the respondents, and hence, the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner, having drawn the attention of this Court to the order, dated 13.08.2019, of a Coordinate Bench of this Court passed in W.P.No.3298 of 2019, submits that the issue i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er were unable to even connect to the system on account of network other failures and that such situation is recognised by various High Courts and that therefore, the petitioner s request merits consideration. Having given earnest consideration to the facts and submissions, we are satisfied that the present issue is squarely covered by the orders passed in the aforesaid writ petition. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
