Partly allowed

Obelisk Composite Technology LLP v. Union of India

Rajasthan HC12 Dec 2019CW/18392/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench held that the challenge to the constitutional validity of Rule 117 under the CGST Rules was no longer res integra. Despite the last date for filing being extended by the Union of India until December 31, 2019, the Court could not entertain the prayer to declare the Rule unconstitutional. The Court granted liberty for the petitioner to apply via the GST Council for issuance of a

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to apply to GST Council for a recommendation certificate to enable claiming CENVAT credit by December 31, 2019.

Obelisk Composite Technology LLP Vs Union of India — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 18392/2019

¶3

Obelisk Composite Technology Llp, Through Partner Mr. Mukesh Maheshwari Khasra No. 1102/740/1 Mia Phase Ii, Basni Jodhpur.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Union Of India, Through The Secretary To The Govt. Of India, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi.

¶7

The Secretary, Gst Council, Government Of India, New Delhi.

¶8

The Asst. Commissioner, Gst, Circle C Ward-3, Jodhpur. ----Respondents

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Maheshwari with Mr. Shubhankar Johari Mr. Lalit Parihar For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Bhansali Mr. Rajvendra Saraswat

¶10

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. INDRAJIT MAHANTY HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶11

Order

¶12

12/12/2019

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶14

In the present writ application, the petitioner M/s Obelisk Composite Technology LLP through its partner has made a prayer seeking writ of mandamus to the effect that the filing of declaration in form GST Trans-1 may be allowed to enable the petitioner to claim transition credit of eligible duties on the appointed day in terms of Section 140 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and to credit the same in its relevant ledger

¶15

(2 of 3)

¶16

[CW-18392/2019]

¶17

account or in the alternative to refund the eligible amount to the petitioner.

¶18

A further prayer has been made to declare Rule 117 of the CGST Rules to claim transitional Credit violates the Constitutional provisions and therefore it may be turned down or ordered to be read down as if there is no last date to file TRANS-1.

¶19

A further prayer has been made to direct the respondents to revive the facility of filing TRANS-1 on common portal. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue brought to our notice a judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7454/2019 (M/s Anupam Motors Vs. Union of India) wherein challenge to Rule 117 of the Rules were held to be no longer res integra in view of the decision of Gujarat High Court in Willowood Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (R/ Special Civil Application No. 4252 of 2018) decided on 12th/19th September, 2018 and the challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 140 (3) of CGST Act and the proviso to Rule 117 of the Rules were dismissed.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State further submits that the Union of India has extended the last date for submitting the GST TRANS-1 upto 31^st December, 2019 but the procedure stipulated under Sub-rule 1(A) of Rule 117 requires the petitioner to make application through the GST counsel who may make a recommendation to the Commissioner who shall act on the basis of such direction of the counsel. 7. In this respect, our attention was drawn to a judgment passed by this Court in SBCWP No. 4315/2019 (M/s Shree Motors Vs. Union of India & Ors.) which was disposed of vide order dated 21.11.2019.

¶21

(3 of 3)

¶22

[CW-18392/2019]

¶23

Accordingly, upon taking the aforesaid submissions into consideration, we are of the considered view that the challenge to the constitutional validity of Rule 117 no more being res integra, this Court cannot entertain such prayer and accordingly reject the same, however, considering the fact that the Union of India and the Finance Department have extended the period contemplated under Rule 1A of Rule 117 till 31^st December, 2019, we grant liberty to the petitioner to make an application before GST Council (through Standing Counsel, who is further requested to hand over the same to the jurisdictional officer) for forwarding the same to the GST Council to issue requisite certificate of recommendation alongwith requisite particulars, evidence and a certified copy of the order instantly and such decision be taken forthwith and if the petitioner’s assertion is found to be correct, the GST Council shall issue necessary recommendation to the Commissioner to enable the petitioner to get the benefit of CENVAT credit within the stipulated time as stipulated by the Union of India i.e on or before 31^st December, 2019.

¶24

The writ application stands disposed of in terms of the aforesaid directions.

¶25

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J (INDRAJIT MAHANTY),CJ

¶26

ns. 50-1/-

Obelisk Composite Technology LLP v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Obelisk Composite Technology LLP v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaravi Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

M/S Anil Engineering through Proprietor Vs C.C.E. Jaipur-Ii and Ors.

M/S Jain Metal Components P Ltd. Vs U.O.I.and Ors.

Mangilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Satya Narayan Salvi Vs State Rural Deve.and Pan. Raj. and Ors.

Balu Lal Vs the State of Rajasthan