9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2020, 6744/2020, 6804/2020 Mrs. Justice Sabina And Mr. Justice Chandra Kumar Songara For the Petitioners(s) : Mr. Rahul Lodha Advocate,, Mr. Daksh Pareek Advocate with Mr., Arjun Singh Advocate on behalf of Mr., Sameer Jain Advocate,, Mr. Sanjay Jhanwar Advocate with Mr., Prakul Khurana Advocate and Mr. Atul, Saxena Advocate,, Mr. Priyesh Kasliwal Advocate with Mr., Jatin Harjai Advocate on behalf of Mr., P.K. Kasliwal Advocate,, Mr. Sarvesh Jain Advocate,, Ms. Priyamvada Joshi Advocate with, Mr. Pawan Sharma Advocate on behalf, of Mr. Pankaj Ghiya Advocate,, Mr. C.M. Sharma Advocate on behalf of, Mr. Vishweshwar Dutt Advocate, Mr. Ramesh Chandra Agarwal Advocate on behalf of Mr. Subash Kumar Jindal Advocate, Mr. Mohit Khandelwal Advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'the CGST Rules') in order to enable the petitioners to avail Tansitional Credit in Electronic Credit Ledger. It was also prayed that the respondents should give effect to Form GST Tran-1 that had been manually submitted to the respondent-department to avail relevant Legitimate Input Tax Credit. In some of the writ petitions, validity of Rule 117 of the CGST Rules has also been challenged. Order passed in Obelisk Composite Technology LLP (supra) reads as under: "1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. In the present writ application, the petitioner M/s Obelisk Composite Technology LLP through its partner has made a prayer seeking writ of mandamus to the effect tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e stipulated under Sub-rule 1(A) of Rule 117 requires the petitioner to make application through the GST counsel who may make a recommendation to the Commissioner who shall act on the basis of such direction of the counsel. 7. In this respect, our attention was drawn to a judgment passed by this Court in SBCWP No. 4315/2019 (M/s Shree Motors Vs. Union of India & Ors.) which was disposed of vide order dated 21.11.2019. 8. Accordingly, upon taking the aforesaid submissions into consideration, we are of the considered view that the challenge to the constitutional validity of Rule 117 no more being res integra, this Court cannot entertain such prayer and accordingly reject the same, however, considering the fact that the Union of India and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
