M/S Neotys Software Products Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/6453/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01013803202624 July 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD7 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. Y.C. SHIVAKUMAR., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. K HEMA KUMAR., AGA

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010138032026 NC: 2026:KHC:38396 WP No. 6453 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6453 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S NEOTYS SOFTWARE PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED C/O A KRISHNAPPA FINTAX, NO.22, 3RD FLOOR, OXFORD PALAZZO, RUSTAM BAGH LAYOUT, OLD AIRPORT ROAD, BENGALURU-560 017. (A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY REPRESENTED BY SMT.SHILPI JAIN, 41 YEARS, W/O ABHISHEK JAIN, THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE) (PRESENTLY MERGED WITH M/S TRICENTIS INDIA PRIVATE LTD. TECH CENTRE, 2ND FLOOR, PLOT NO. 30, PHASE 1 MIDC, HINJAWADI, RAJIV GANDHI INFOTECH PARK, HINJAWADI, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA-411057. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. Y.C. SHIVAKUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010138032026 NC: 2026:KHC:38396 WP No. 6453 of 2026 LGST-046, 1ST FLOOR, RAKSHITHA COMPLEX, INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE, BENGALURU-560038. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K HEMA KUMAR., AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 73 OF THE GST ACT, 2017 BEARING ASSIGNMENT NO.10450/2023-24 DATED 23.04.2024 AS AT ANNX-A; TO RELEGATE THE MATTER TO THE STAGE OF SHOW -CAUSE NOTICE SINCE THE PETITIONER HAD NO OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010138032026 NC: 2026:KHC:38396 WP No. 6453 of 2026

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is aggrieved by the Adjudication Order dated 23.04.2024 [Annexure-A]. The Adjudication order is for the period between April 2018-March 2019. This Adjudication Order is premised in the assertion that the Show Cause Notice is issued to the petitioner, but it has filed no response.

2.

Sri Y C Shivakumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the proceedings are concluded because the petitioner has declared export of services in the returns in forms GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 but has failed to furnish details to justify the entire turnover and that the petitioner could not respond to either the intimation in Form GST DRC- 01A or to the Show Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-

01.

The learned counsel invites this Court’s attention to the following averment in the memorandum of petition. HC-KAR

CNR: KAHC010138032026 NC: 2026:KHC:38396 “It is submitted that the Petitioner- Company was merged with M/s Tricentis India Private Limited and all the legacy issues have been handled by the merged company, that is, M/s Tricentis India Private Limited. The show cause notice and other notices alleged to have been sent to the petitioner were not in the knowledge of the petitioner.

Hence the petitioner could not participate in the proceedings.”

Sri K Hema Kumar, a learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent, is heard for the disposal of the petition.

3.

This Court, in the circumstances, examines the question whether the petitioner must be admitted to another reasonable opportunity. The respondent has referred to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 20.12. being uploaded on the common portal according to the Act without mentioning the other modes of communication of the Show Cause Notice. The respondent has also referred HC-KAR

CNR: KAHC010138032026 NC: 2026:KHC:38396 to an opportunity of personal hearing being extended to the petitioner on 06.12.2023 and 22.01.2024 observing that the petitioner has not availed this opportunity.

4.

The respondent’s observations in these regards are as follows. “I have carefully gone through the facts detailed in the Show Cause Notice. The allegations made in the Show Cause Notice pertains to declaration of turnover as export of Services. The taxpayer was called upon to justify the declaration of exports in terms of Section 2[6] read with Section 16 of the IGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 96A of the CGST Rules, 2017. The taxpayer has neither furnished the explanation nor has paid the taxes as intimated. I have granted sufficient time and opportunity to the assessee to present their case and put up evidence available with them as per Section 75[4] with a personal hearing opportunity dated 06.12.2023 and dated 22.01.2024.” HC-KAR

CNR: KAHC010138032026 NC: 2026:KHC:38396 The petitioner contends that the entire turnover from supply of software services exported can be explained with the support of the documents. When all the circumstances are considered, this Court is of the view that the petition must be disposed of extending another opportunity to the petitioner. Hence, the following. ORDER

The petition is allowed and the Adjudication Order dated 23.04.2024 [Annexure-A] is quashed subject to the following terms. [a] The proceedings are restored to the respondent for due consideration subject to the petitioner depositing 10% of the tax in demand by 05.10.2026 subject to the outcome in the restored proceedings.

[b] The petitioner is permitted to file response to the show cause notice dated 20.12.2023, along with the certified copy of this Order HC-KAR

CNR: KAHC010138032026 NC: 2026:KHC:38396 and the copies of the documents to show the genuineness of the transactions.

[c] The petitioner shall file such response and produce these documents by 05.10.2026 and the respondent shall consider these documents and then conclude the proceedings by a reasoned order. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

AN/-

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.