Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(v) The Rule provided that every GST registrant who claimed transition of credit in terms of Section 140 of the Act is to file a declaration in Form GSTR TRAN-1 in the common GST Portal within 90 days from 01.07.2017 i.e. 21.09.2017.

(vi) The time limit stood extended on several occasions to provide for the technical glitches plaguing the systems and in order to accommodate the difficulty faced by taxpayers adapt to as well as the officials of the Department to adopt to the new procedure.

(vii) The extension of time limits are from 29.09.2017 to 31.10.2017 vide order No. 2/2017 dated 18.09.2017, upto 30.11.2017 vide order No. 7/2017 dated 28.10.2017 and thereafter upto 27.12.2017 vide order No.10/2017 dated 15.11.2017.

(viii) Parallelly, Rule 120A provided for revision of the TRAN-1 already filed.

(ix) Rule 120A did not, in itself, provide for atime limit for revision but https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis indicated that such limits may be inferred from the timelines as set out under Rule

(x) Thus, the extension of timelines granted in respect of filing of TRAN-1 under Rule 117 applied equally in respect of the timelines for revision as well.

(xi) As a consequence, the time limit for revision of TRAN also ended on 27.12.2017 by implication, as under order No.10/2017 dated 15.11.2017.

(xii) The petitioner uploaded its TRAN-1 on 27.12.2017 claiming transition of the CENVAT credit balance. However, an error had been occasioned therein wherein instead of mentioning the amount as Rs.16,21,227/- as per ER 1 return filed for the month of June 2017, it had mistakenly referred to the amount as Rs.76,395/-.

(xv) A representation was filed before R1 on 28.12.2018 explaining the errors and seeking permission for availment of the credit to which the petitioner is, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis admittedly, entitled but no response was received. Hence this writ petition.

4. The petitioners' questions the wisdom in the last dates for filing of TRAN-1 and revision of TRAN-1 being one and the same, leading to an absurdity in the practical application of the respective Rules.