Case Summary
Case Title: M/s Jagdalpur Motors v. Union of India & Ors.
Court: High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur
Petition No.: Writ Petition (T) No.252 of 2022
Judgment Date: 28.11.2022
Category of Dispute: Input Tax Credit (Transitional Credit – Revision of TRAN-1)
Relevant Provisions: Section 140 CGST Act, 2017; Rule 117, Rule 120, Rule 120A of CGST Rules, 2017
Judge: Hon’ble Justice P. Sam Koshy
Facts (Paras 1–4)
The petitioner, M/s Jagdalpur Motors, failed to correctly file its TRAN-1 form due to an inadvertent error by its consultant while availing transitional credit. Though the Supreme Court in Union of India v. Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. (22.07.2022; extended on 02.09.2022) directed reopening of the GST portal for filing/revision of TRAN-1/TRAN-2, the petitioner mistakenly entered “Nil” in the column for outstanding credit. Once submitted, the form froze, preventing revision. Despite filing a representation dated 27.10.2022 seeking revision, no action was taken, leading to the present writ petition.
Questions Before the Court
-
Whether Rule 120A of the CGST Rules, allowing revision of TRAN-1 once, remained applicable during the special window opened under Supreme Court’s order in Filco Trade Centre.
-
Whether the circular dated 09.09.2022 (Clause 4.6.2) prohibiting revision could override statutory provisions and bar the petitioner from correcting its declaration.
Observations (Paras 5–14)
-
The Union of India argued that the Supreme Court’s order and subsequent circular limited the filing opportunity as a one-time measure, disallowing revision (Para 5–7).
-
The petitioner contended that Rule 120A permitted revision once, and a circular cannot override statutory provisions (Para 8–11).
-
The Court noted that Rule 120A, inserted w.e.f. 15.09.2017, expressly allowed revision of TRAN-1 once. The Supreme Court’s order only extended the timeline and did not exclude applicability of Rule 120A (Para 9–10).
-
Circulars are merely clarificatory and cannot override statutory rules. Hence, Clause 4.6.2 of Circular No.180/12/2022-GST (09.09.2022) could not nullify Rule 120A (Para 13–14).
Judgment (Paras 15–18)
The Court held that Rule 120A applied even during the extended period under the Supreme Court’s directions. Accordingly, it directed the Union of India, GST Council, and GSTN to reopen the portal for the petitioner once, enabling revision of TRAN-1. The petitioner was ordered to complete filing before 30.11.2022 (the extended deadline). No further revision would be allowed. The writ petition was thus disposed of.
Table of Referred Case Laws
| Case | Citation | Court | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Union of India v. Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. | SLP(C) Nos. 32709-32710/2018, Order dated 22.07.2022 & 02.09.2022 | Supreme Court | Directed reopening of GSTN portal for two months (later extended), permitting all assessees to file/revise TRAN-1/TRAN-2 irrespective of litigation history. |
Between Fine Lines
This ruling emphasizes that statutory rights under Rule 120A to revise TRAN-1 once cannot be curtailed by departmental circulars. For businesses, this clarifies that if an inadvertent error occurs while filing transitional credit, Rule 120A safeguards their right to correct it, even during special windows ordered by the Supreme Court. Executive instructions cannot override the GST law and rules.
Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”
