Back
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY K. AGRAWAL, SANJAY KUMAR
Union of India Through Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue – Appellant
Versus
Jagdalpur Motors Through Director, Shri Niraj Sharma – Respondent
Order :
(Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.)
“12. … There can be no doubt that the authorities functioning under the Act must, as are in duty bound, protect the interest of the Revenue by levying and collecting the duty in accordance with law – no less and also no more. It is no part of their duty to deprive an assessee of the benefit available to him in law with a view to augment the quantum of duty for the benefit of the Revenue. They must act reasonably and fairly.”
1.The aforesaid statement of law rendered by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the matter of Unichem Laboratories Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, (2002) 7 SCC 145 squarely applies to the facts of the present case, as in this case also, the writ petitioner was denied the benefit of filing the revised FORM GST TRAN-1 unfairly.
2.Invoking the writ appellate jurisdiction of this Court under Section 2(1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006, the Union of India / appellants herein / respondents No.1, 2, 3 & 5 of the writ petition have preferred this writ appeal calling in question legality, validity and correctness of judgment & order dated 28-11-2022 passed by the writ court in W.P.(T) No.
Authorities must act reasonably and fairly, ensuring assessees are not deprived of legal benefits due to technical errors in filing forms.
The court established that procedural timelines should not infringe upon vested rights to claim tax credits, especially in light of technical challenges faced by taxpayers.
The period prescribed under Rule 117 of the Rules for filing the TRAN-1 Form was merely directory and not mandatory.
Vested rights for transitioning unutilized CENVAT credits under the GST regime cannot be denied due to technical difficulties; taxpayers are entitled to rectify their filings.
The entitlement to Input Tax Credit cannot be denied on account of procedural problems and technical glitches.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that unutilized input tax credit is a vested right and property, and should not be denied on procedural or technical grounds.
The rights of the assessee in the credit standing in their favor cannot be deprived without authority of law, and relief can be granted based on technical glitches in filing forms.
Transitional credit rights under GST cannot be denied due to procedural shortcomings when there is no revenue loss, emphasizing the significance of legitimate claims in tax law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
