In the present case, while filing TRAN-1 the error is seen to be inadvertent, constituting a human error. The petitioner is permitted to transition the credit.
Section 140 of the CGST Act, 2017- Transitional Credit – The petitioner challenged order dated 19.09.2019, rejecting his request for carry forward of ITC. The TRAN-1, Form for carrying forward credit was filed within time, that is, on 19.09.2017, on the GSTN Portal. However, an inadvertent error had crept into the Form and instead of posting the amount of credit as Rs. 54,94,151/- only an amount of Rs. 29,05,595/- was updated. While attempting to correct the error, yet another mistake occurred as the difference was updated in table 7d of the Form instead of table 7b. A request for rectification came to be filed on 12.03.2019, that came to be rejected, by order dated 19.09.2019. The respondent counsel submitted that there had been several opportunities for rectification of the mistake as time had been extended till 31.03.20201. However, this was not done. The court observed that the error is seen to be inadvertent, constituting a human error. The Revenue does not dispute this either.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed writ petition and directed the respondent to enable the modification to be effected as well as the transition within a period of four weeks.
In the present case, while filing TRAN-1 the error is seen to be inadvertent, constituting a human error. The petitioner is permitted to transition the credit.
Section 140 of the CGST Act, 2017- Transitional Credit – The petitioner challenged order dated 19.09.2019, rejecting his request for carry forward of ITC. The TRAN-1, Form for carrying forward credit was filed within time, that is, on 19.09.2017, on the GSTN Portal. However, an inadvertent error had crept into the Form and instead of posting the amount of credit as Rs. 54,94,151/- only an amount of Rs. 29,05,595/- was updated. While attempting to correct the error, yet another mistake occurred as the difference was updated in table 7d of the Form instead of table 7b. A request for rectification came to be filed on 12.03.2019, that came to be rejected, by order dated 19.09.2019. The respondent counsel submitted that there had been several opportunities for rectification of the mistake as time had been extended till 31.03.20201. However, this was not done. The court observed that the error is seen to be inadvertent, constituting a human error. The Revenue does not dispute this either.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed writ petition and directed the respondent to enable the modification to be effected as well as the transition within a period of four weeks.