Input Tax Credit is a property right; denial due to clerical errors is unjustified, emphasizing necessity for the taxpayer to correct mistakes without losing entitled benefits.

JUDGMENT :

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J.

The petitioner was a registered dealer under the provisions of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act and upon introduction of the CGST/KSGST Acts, with effect from 01.07.2017, the petitioner migrated to GST by obtaining a registration under the said Act as the registered taxpayer. The dispute in this writ petition pertains to the denial of Input Tax Credit, that was available to the petitioner pertaining to the pre-GST period; to be precise, for the period from April 2017 to June 2017. Section 140 of the CGST Act contemplates the transitional arrangements for the claim of Input Tax Credit, and Sub Section (1) of Section 140 provides that, a registered person, other than a person opting to pay tax under section 10, shall be entitled to take, in his electronic credit ledger, the amount of CENVAT credit of eligible duties carried forward in the return relating to the period ending with the day immediately preceding the appointed day, furnished by him in such manner as may be prescribed.

2. According to the petitioner, as the petitioner was having Input Tax Credit in respect of the transactions pertaining to the period referred to above, which were during pre-GST period, they were entitled to carry forward the said credit to the GST regime by virtue of Sub Section (1) of Section 140 of the CGST Act. The initial period fixed for claiming the benefit of carry forward as contemplated under the transitional provisions in Section 140 was up to 27.12.2017. However, later, as per the direction issued by the Honourable Supreme Court in Union of India v. M/S Filco Trade Centre Private Limited [S.L.P.(C) No.32709 and 32710 of 2018], the time limit was extended up to 30.11.2022 for all the taxpayers. The petitioner submitted Ext.P7, Form GST TRAN-1, which is the prescribed form for submitting the benefit of carry forward under Section 140 of the Act, on 30.11.2022, the last date on which the same ought to have been submitted. According to the petitioner, the application could not be successfully uploaded, as certain errors were shown in the portal. Accordingly, the petitioner raised a grievance on 01.12.2022, bearing Ticket No.G-202212019767112. The petitioner also submitted Ext.P9, before the 6^th respondent, highlighting this aspect as well. Ext.P10 is the response received from the Help Desk, where the reply was in the manner as follows:

“We have tried filing our TRAN-1 form for receiving transitional credit during pre-gst regime as per latest Supreme Court guidelines before 30.11.2022. However, during the filling of form Online, we encountered an error in table 7(b) regarding date of booking invoices. All our invoices were booked before 01.07.2017. However the excel utility did not accepted the date and we could not validate our form for filing. We tried all means.”

3. Thus, as the grievance highlighted by the petitioner with regard to the rejection of application due to technical error, was not addressed, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction of like nature to the Respondents, directing the respondents to resolve the technical glitch raised by the petitioner through Ext.P9 as promised in Ext.P10 and allow the petitioner the transitional Input tax credit on opening stock, as available on the opening day of GST laws (Closing stock as on 30-06- 2017), to which the petitioner is legally entitled to under CGST and the SGST Acts, through the Electronic Credit Ledger and, if necessary, by making necess