IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 08.01.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.No.18058 of 2023 M/s.Parekh Integrated Services Pvt Ltd Represented by Mr.Nurani Subramanian Sivan

117/3C, Padmavathi Garden, Velapanchavadi, Chennai – 600077. ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Superintendent of GST & CEX Maduravoyal Range, Poonamallee Division, Chennai Outer Commissionerate Chennai – 600056.

2. The Commissioner of GST & CEX, Chennai Outer Commissionerate Newry towers, Anna Nagar, Chennai-600040. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in the proceeding in GST TRAN -1 Order No.3/2023-MDV-SUPDT dated 27.02.2023 issued by the Respondent No.1 and quash the same, directing the Respondent No.1 to consider the endorsed documents as valid document for availment of CGST.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Senguttuvan For Respondents : Mr.S.R.Sundar, Senior Standing Counsel.

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated

27.02.2023 passed by the first respondent in GST TRAN-1 Order No.3/2023- MDV SUPDT, whereby the petitioner’s claim for transitional credit for a sum of Rs.92,00,093/- has been partly rejected and only to the extent for a sum of Rs.8,79,624/- was allowed under Table 7(a) Part 7B in terms of Rule 117(4) of the CGST Rules read with the provisions of the CGST Act. Relevant portion of the impugned order dated 27.02.2023 reads as under:-

“12. FINDINGS:

In view of the above, I have gone through the facts of the case, documents and evidence available on record and the reply submitted by the tax payer. I find that:-

12.1. In respect of transitional credit claimed in table 7(a) in Entry 7A credit amount of Rs.83,20,469/- on account of CGST is found inadmissible as the tax payer did not comply with Section 140(3), 140(4)(b) and 140(6) and 140(7) of CGST Act 2017 and has failed to submit the any duty paid documents in respect of the amount claimed.

Further, the Legal provisions in respect of transitional credit claimed under 7(a) in Entry 7A as per Circular No.182/14/2022-GST dated 10.11.2022 is given below:-

Check 5: In cases where the credit is being shown by an assessee who was registered in Central Excise or Service on account of inputs relating to exempted goods, carefully check whether the assessee has followed the provisions of rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules in the period prior to GST. Case I: Only exempted goods/services were being manufactured or provided. Rule 6(2) of CENVAT Credit Rules did not allow any credit in the CENVAT register if only exempted goods were being manufactured. No credit can flow from return in relation to inputs in such cases. The entry in table 5(a) therefore should be NIL. The apportionment of credit on inputs and complete reversal thereof under Rule 6 of CENVAT Credit Rules took place at the time of removal of goods. Therefore, in such cases only credit of inputs and inputs contained in semi-finished which existed in stock on the day of the transition and for which conditions prescribed in cl (i) to (v) of Section 140(3) are satisfied would be available. Where the stock shown is very high, verification using VAT return or any other collateral document where stocks are declared can be done. Case II: Exempted and non-exempted goods/services were being manufactured or provided: Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules provided the procedure for apportionment of credit relating to taxable goods/services and reversal of credit relating to exempted goods/services. Credit in table 5(a) would flow from the return in such cases. It should be checked that the return reflects credit after application of rule 6(3) of CENVAT Credit Rules. The reversal in terms of rule 6(3) was required to be done at the time of removal of finished goods. Therefore, some credit in Table 7A can arise for such inputs which were in stock and which not attributed till the date of the transit