M/S Slpp Renew LLP vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has called in question the Adjudication Order dated 18.02.2025 [Annexure-B] under Section 73 (1) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017/Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short, ‘the CGST/KGST Act’] while seeking declaration that Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST/KGST Act is arbitrary. The petitioner alternatively seeks this Court’s interference with the Adjudication Order for an opportunity to the HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010416832026 NC: 2026:KHC:39749 petitioner to file response to the Show Cause Notice dated 26.11.2024. 2. Sri K.M. Shivayogiswamy, the learned counsel or the petitioner, and Sri Aravind V. Chavan, a learned standing counsel for the respondent, are heard on whether this Court must interfere to restore the proceeding with opportunity to the petitioner to file response to the Show Cause Notice dated 26.11.2024 with Sri K.M. Shivayogiswamy being categorical that the petitioner would not seek for any declaration against Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST/KGST Act if there could be restoration.
The petitioner is issued with Show Cause Notice on eleven different issues such as difference in GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, difference in taxable value declared in GSTR-3B on zero rated supplies, excess availment of ITC on inward Reverse Charge Mechanism supplies, and excess availment of ITC in HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010416832026 NC: 2026:KHC:39749 GSTR-3B than the actual admissible ITC as per GSTR-2A. The respondent has concluded the proceedings observing that the petitioner has not filed response and has even failed to avail the opportunity of personal hearing.
The petitioner contends that the notices and intimation are allegedly uploaded on the portal and sent through email, but the petitioner had not received any email. The petitioner further contends that if an opportunity is extended, it will be able to produce all the purchase bills for the inward supplies and offer explanation for delay in uploading Returns or details of GSTR-1/GSTR-2A. The adjudication is completed ex parte because the petitioner has not responded even to the Show Cause Notice or the intimation for the personal hearing. There is nothing on record to indicate that the Show Cause Notice and HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010416832026 NC: 2026:KHC:39749 the intimation were indeed sent to the petitioner’s last known address under acknowledgment.
The petitioner is categorical in asserting that it is in possession of purchase bills and other records to justify the inward supplies and the Returns filed in GSTR-3B and that it can justify the delay in some of the suppliers remitting taxes belatedly. This Court, in the circumstances of the case and with the petitioner giving up the challenge to the constitutionality of Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST/KGST Act, is of the view that the petitioner must have another opportunity to show cause against the demand based on the different issues. This Court is also of the view that the petitioner must be extended with such opportunity subject to deposit of 10% of the tax in demand on the first date of appearance as mentioned by this Court. Hence, the following: HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010416832026 NC: 2026:KHC:39749 ORDER The petition is allowed in-part and the Adjudication Order dated 18.02.2025 [Annexure-B] is quashed subject to the following terms. [a] The proceedings are restored to the respondent for due consideration subject to deposit of 10% of tax demand by 21.09.2026 subject to the outcome in the restored proceedings.
[b] The petitioner is permitted to file, along with the certified copy of this Order, the copies of the documents to show the genuineness of the transactions. HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010416832026 NC: 2026:KHC:39749 [c] The petitioner shall produce these documents by 21.09.2026 and the respondent shall consider these documents and then conclude the proceedings by a reasoned order. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE
SA Ct:sr
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.