BCC DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. vs PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX, DELHI-SOUTH
$~23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 01.03.2024
+ W.P.(C) 13075/2023
BCC DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTERS PVT. LTD. ….. Petitioner
versus
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX, DELHI-SOUTH ….. Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner Mr. Rahul Malhotra and Mr. Ativ Gupta, Advocates
For the Respondents: Mr. Aditya Singla, SSC with Mr. Raghav Bakshi, Advocate for C,BIC
CORAM:-
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to refund the GST in the sum of Rs. 16,19,838/- to the petitioner which has been deposited against the non-migrated GST i.e. 07AAACB0226C1ZJ.
2. Petitioner was earlier registered during Service Tax Regime and possessed a VAT number as also a service tax number. When the GST Regime came into play, the earlier registration of VAT and Service Tax were to be migrated into a GST number.
3. Since one individual could not have two GST numbers, petitioner opted for migration of only one number i.e. its VAT registration and was allotted a GST number No.07AAACB0226C2ZI.
4. As per the petitioner, petitioner was not aware that the service tax registration number had also been migrated without his knowledge and a GST number issued i.e. No.07AAACB0226C2ZI (non-migrated GST number).
5. As per the petitioner, petitioner, after such migration, has only been using the migrated GST number and was not even aware of the non-migrated GST number. Petitioner became aware of the non-migrated GST number when one of the clients of the petitioner claimed to have deposited the GST credit and the same was not reflected in the migrated GST number.
6. As per the petitioner, on a search being conducted on the portal, petitioner became aware of the non-migrated number and also found that an amount of Rs. 16,19,838/- was lying to the credit of the petitioner in the non-migrated GST number.
7. Petitioner seeks refund of the said amount or alternative credit of the said amount to the migrated GST number.
8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that there is no provision available in the GST portal for transfer of the credit from one GST number to another. He however concedes that the petitioner did not opt for the migration of the service tax registration and the system automatically created a GST number (i.e. the non-migrated GST number).
9. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that the amount standing to the credit of the non-migrated GST number be transferred to the migrated GST number of the petitioner.
10. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.
11. Further, respondent and the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs are directed to look into the issue of the automatic generation of non-migrated GST number and in case such a technical error is noticed in the portal, rectificatory steps be taken for identifying such non-migrated numbers and cancellation thereof within a period of four weeks from today.
12. List for reporting compliance on the issue of subsisting non-migrated GST numbers which are still active on 08.04.2024.
13. Order be communicated to the Board through counsel appearing for the respondents for necessary compliance.
14. Order dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
MARCH 1, 2024
rs
W.P.(C) 13075/2023 Page 4 of 4