Order dated : 08 July 2025 

Parties: M/s Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd.  Vs Union of India, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs and The Deputy Commissioner

Facts –

• The Petitioner, M/s Johnson Matthey Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd., originally filed TRAN-1 in August 2017, but missed claiming ₹1.16 crore related to 3 bills of entry from May/June 2017. The omission was informed to the department in February 2018, within one year. Due to the GST regime, the excise portal was inactive, so a manual revised ER-1 was filed in November 2022, followed by a revised TRAN-1. 
• The department rejected the claim, citing lack of electronic revision and time bar under CENVAT rules.

 Issue –

• Whether transitional credit under Section 140 of the CGST Act can be denied merely because the petitioner filed a manual revised excise return, when electronic filing was not possible after the GST regime commenced?

Order –

• The Single Bench of Hon'ble High Court observed that in the absence of any electronic mode available post 1 July 2017 to revise the excise return of the period prior to 1 July 2017, the claim of the petitioner cannot be rejected on the ground that the revised return ought to have been filed electronically. It would amount to calling upon the petitioner to do something which was not possible electronically post 1 July 2017.
• There were technical issues with respect to revising TRAN-1 and non-availability of electronic mode to revise excise return and it is only after directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of Filco Trade Centre Pvt. Ltd. that the petitioner was able to revise its TRAN-1/TRAN-2 by filing manual revised excise return to claim the credit and transitioned under new regime. 
• Even otherwise, if the petitioner is rightly entitled to claim the credit which the respondents have otherwise not raised any objection to except on the ground of time limit of claiming the same, this Court in the case of Aberdare Technologies Pvt. Ltd. under the GST regime has permitted the assessee to rectify the error post the statutory period if there is no loss to the revenue.
• The impugned order dated 27 February 2023 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to accept the revised excise return filed manually