Bombay High Court
Mahle Anand Thermal Systems ... vs Union Of Inida Thr. Secretary ... on 11 February, 2022
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka, S. M. Modak
5-wp1174-22.doc
vai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally
signed by
VASANT
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
VASANT ANANDRAO
ANANDRAO IDHOL
IDHOL Date:
2022.02.12
12:52:58
+0530 WRIT PETITION NO.1174 OF 2022
M/s.Mahle Anand Termal Systems Pvt. Ltd. ...Petitioner
V/s.
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr.Bharat Raichandani with Mr.Mahesh Raichandani and
Mr.Rishabh Jain i/b UBR Legal Advocates for the Petitioner.
Mr.Jitendra B. Mishra with Ms.Sangeeta Yadav for the Respondent
Nos.1 to 5.
Ms. Kavita N. Solunke, AGP for the State-Respondent No.8.
CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA &
S.M. MODAK, JJ.
DATE : 11TH FEBRUARY, 2022.
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)
P.C. :-
1. Mr.Raichandani, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks
to delete the respondent nos.6 and 7 in the cause title. Leave to
amend is granted. The amendment to be carried out within one week
from today. Re-verification is dispensed with.
2. Rule. Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1
to 5 waives service. Ms.Solunke, learned AGP for the respondent
no.4 waives service. By consent of parties, the petition is heard
finally.
5-wp1174-22.doc
3. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, the petitioner seeks an order and direction against the
respondents to allow the petitioner to correct Form GSTR 1 Return
and Invoice by mentioning the correct GST No. of their customer and
other reliefs.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that there were three
inadvertent errors in SAP wherein GSTN number remained to be
corrected/updated from Andhra returns. The petitioner made various
representations to the respondents to allow them to correct their
GSTR, but of no avail. The representation is pending since 13 th
December, 2021.
5. Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 5
on instructions states that the said representation will be decided
within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this
order. Statement is accepted.
6. Mr.Raichandani, learned counsel for the petitioner invited
our attention to the judgment of the Madras High Court in case of
Pentacle Plant Machineries Pvt. Ltd. v/s. GST Council
Secretariat, 2021-TIOL-604-HC-MAD-GST and in case of Sun Dye
Chem v/s. Assistant Commissioner, 2020-TIOL-1858-HC-MAD-
GST. He submits that both the judgments would clearly apply to the
5-wp1174-22.doc
facts of this case.
7. In view of the statement made by Mr.Mishra, learned
counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 5, we direct the respondent no.2
to decide the said representation made by the petitioner within a
period of eight weeks from today without fail in accordance with law
after considering the applicability of the Circulars dated 26/26/2017-
GST dated 29th December, 2017 and the judgment of the Madras
High Court in case of Pentacle Plant Machineries Pvt. Ltd. (supra)
and in case of Sun Dye Chem (supra). The order that would be
passed by the respondent no.2 shall be communicated to the
petitioner within one week from the date of passing of the order. If the
representation made by the petitioner is allowed, the respondent no.2
shall permit the petitioner to carry out rectification in the GST number
in question within one week from the date of the said order. If the
order is adverse, the petitioner would be at liberty to file appropriate
proceedings.
8. Writ Petition is allowed in aforesaid terms. Rule is made
absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
(S.M. MODAK, J.) (R.D. DHANUKA, J.)
