2019 Taxo.online 778
COPC No.139 of 2019 dated 16.11.2019
M/s JAY BEE INDUSTRIES
MOHAMMAD SHADAAB & ORS
Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017
Rules 117 of CGST Act, 2017
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Justice
In favour of revenue
Represented by: –
Petitioner: -Mr. Surinder Saklani and Mr. Ajay Jain, Advocates
Respondent: – Mr. Rajiv Jiwan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ajit Sharma and Ms. Ragini Dogra, Advocates, for respondent , Mr. Ajay Vaidya, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Vinod Thakur, Additional Advocate General, Mr. Bhupinder Thakur, Deputy Advocate General and Mr. Ram Lal Thakur, Assistant Advocate General,
The petitioner has filed the present contempt proceedings against the respondents on the ground that they have violated the order dated 19.09.2018 passed in CWP No. 2169 of 2018 which reads as under:
“Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the objections, if any, positively within a period of three weeks from today. Such undertaking is accepted and taken on record Issue notice. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned ASGI and Mr. Adarsh Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, waive notice on behalf of respondent No.1 and respondents No.2 and 3, respectively. Issue separate notice to respondent No.4 returnable within four weeks, on taking steps within three days. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out the urgency and that being if the petitioner is not allowed to upload the Tran-I return, the petitioner would not get credit of ITC. Under these circumstances, we direct the respondents to provisionally allow the petitioner to upload the Trans-I return by opening a window by whatever mode. We clarify that the return filed, if any, shall be subject to the outcome of the present petition. List on 24.10.2018. Response by the appearing parties be positively filed within a period of two weeks, rejoinder, if any, within two weeks thereafter. Copy dasti.”
A Division Bench of this Court has already disposed of the aforesaid writ petition i.e. CWP No. 2169 of 2018 vide its order dated 16.11.2019 wherein it has specifically been held that it was only on the ground of technical glitches that TRAN-1 Form could not be filed as the GST network had prevented the petitioner from claiming input tax credit of the excess duty paid by its vendor. Admittedly, such technical glitches have continued even thereafter
Once, that be so, then obviously, it cannot be said that the respondents have either deliberately or willfully violated the orders of this Court.
Consequently, there is no merit in this contempt petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. Notices issued to the respondents are ordered to be discharged.