High Court of Karnataka in case of Pragati Automotion (P.) Ltd. v/s Union of India vide its Writ Petition No: 3159 dated 31st January 2019 has held that bonafide error made while filing TRAN-1 nodal officer was directed to consider the complaint.

 

Pragati Automotion (P.) Ltd (Assessee) filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the GST Authorities to permit it to correct the bona fide error which had crept in while filing the Form GST TRAN-1 because of which it was deprived of the transitional credit of an amount of Rs. 9.74 crores n Column – 5 of Table 5(a) of Form GST TRAN - 1 well within the time prescribed by the statute.

 

Revised Form GST TRAN - 1 was filed by the petitioner on 27.12.2017 after including the details of goods sent to job worker and held in his stock on behalf of the principal manufacturer in terms of Section 141 of CGST Act credit pertaining to job work. However, credit claim was indicated only in Column – 5 of Table 5(a) but not in Column – 6. The electronic credit ledger reflected the credit of Rs.5,89,346/-. The petitioner made several complaints before the Nodal Officer, but the same has not been considered so far.

 

High Court has held that it is hardly required to be stated that the Nodal Officer appointed under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act and the State Goods and Services Tax Act is obligated to consider the complaint of the assessee and take a decision in the matter.

 

However, the same has not been done. It is imperative for the Court to direct the Nodal Officer to consider the complaint/representation made by the assessee and take a decision in an expedited manner.

 

 

Writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the above.