M/S. Src Company Infra PVT LTD vs. Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)

WP/12496/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01027350202615 July 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD6 pages

For Petitioner: SRI. SANDEEPANI A. NEGLUR., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI.K HEMA KUMAR., AGA

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The petitioner's appeal against an adjudication order, filed after the rejection of a rectification application, was dismissed by the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the KGST Act due to limitation. The Appellate Authority, even after excluding the period spent on the rectification application, found the appeal to be delayed by 7 days beyond the condonable period.

Held

The High Court held that the 7-day delay, which was beyond the condonable period even after excluding the time spent on the rectification application, should be condoned to allow a decision on merits. It quashed the Appellate Authority's order and restored the appeal for reconsideration.

Key Issues

The key legal issue was whether the Appellate Authority correctly applied the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 107, specifically concerning the exclusion of time spent on a rectification application and the condonation of a minor delay.

Sections Cited

Section 107(11), Section 107(1), Section 73(9), Section 161

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010273502026 NC: 2026:KHC:36317 WP No. 12496 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 12496 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. SRC COMPANY INFRA PVT LTD A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS DIRECTOR, SHRI. ATHALURI VENKATA KRISHNA PRASAD, HAVING OFFICE AT GROUND FLOOR, 260/A, RUTHU NILAYA, JP NAGAR, HOSPET, BALLARI, - 583201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANDEEPANI A. NEGLUR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS) DAVANGERE DIVISION, CR BUILDING CGST OFFICE, C BLOCK, 3RD MAIN, DAVANAGERE - 577006. Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010273502026 NC: 2026:KHC:36317 WP No. 12496 of 2026 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT-1), DGSTO DAVANGERE, II CROSS, NEHRU COLONY, HOSAPETE 583203. 3. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, KARNATAKA (BENGALURU), VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA, GANDHI NAGAR, KALIDASA ROAD, BENGALURU 560009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K HEMA KUMAR., AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (I) QUASHING THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 20.02.2026 BEARING NO. KGST/AP-663/2024- 25 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 107 OF THE KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 FOR THE SUBJECT TAX PERIOD 2019-20 (ANNEXURE A); (II) RESTORING THE APPEAL OF THE PETITIONER IN FORM GST APL-01 DATED 26.02.2025 ON THE FILES OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE J ) AND DIRECTING THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO HEAR, CONSIDER AND DISPOSE OFF THE SAID APPEAL OF THE PETITIONER ON MERITS AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW; (III) ALTERNATIVELY, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ADJUDICATION ORDER DATED 14.08.2024 BEARING FILE NO ACCT(AUDIT- 1)/HPT/GST- - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010273502026 NC: 2026:KHC:36317 WP No. 12496 of 2026 ADJN/ORDER-62/2024-25/T- PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 73(9) OF THE KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 AND UNDER SECTION 73(9) OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 AND UNDER SECTION 20 OF THE INTEGRATED GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 READ WITH SECTION 73(9) OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 FOR THE TAX PERIOD 2019-2020 (ANNEXURE B ); (IV) QUASHING

THE IMPUGNED SUMMARY OF ADJUDICATION ORDER IN FORM GST DRC 07 DATED 14.08.2024 BEARING REFERENCE NO. ZD290824054310G ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER THE SECTION 73 OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 FOR THE TAX PERIOD 2019-2020 (ANNEXURE B-1); (V) QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF REJECTION OF APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION DATED 24.01.2025 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO. 2 UNDER SECTION 161 OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 FOR THE TAX PERIOD 2019-2020 (ANNEXURE H ).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD HC-KAR

CNR: KAHC010273502026 NC: 2026:KHC:36317 ORAL ORDER

The petitioner's appeal under Section 107(11) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short, the 'KGST Act'] is rejected on the ground of limitation. The petitioner has filed this appeal against the Adjudication Order dated 14.08.2024 after the rejection of the Rectification Application on 24.01.2025. The application is filed on 19.10.2024. The Appellate Authority's reason to hold that the appeal is belated reads as under. "Therefore, the countdown to submit appeal against the order-in-original will start from 14.08.2024 and not from 24.01.2025 as contended by the appellant company. At the most, the time spent in the course of rectification proceedings may be excluded while calculating the time taken to submit appeal against the order-in-original. Even this concession is unable to save the appellant company from rejecting the appeal at the threshold. As discussed supra, even if the period between 19.10.2024 & 24.01.2025 is excluded, the appeal against the order-in- HC-KAR

CNR: KAHC010273502026 NC: 2026:KHC:36317 original is submitted after 3 months and 7 days. This indicates that the appeal is still delayed by atleast 7 days as per the prescribed time limit in section 107(1) of the KGST/CGST Act, 2017. "

This Court must observe that it is not contested that the time spent in prosecuting a Rectification Application is excluded and that if that period is excluded the petitioner's appeal is presented within three months. Further, if there is a delay beyond these three months, the delay over the next 30 days can be condoned. The Appellate Authority has excluded the time and has also concluded that with the exclusion of the time spent in prosecuting the rectification application, the delay beyond three months is only by seven [7] days. This delay must be condoned as that would enable a decision on merits. In the circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petition must be favoured restoring the appeal for a decision on merits. Hence, the following HC-KAR

CNR: KAHC010273502026 NC: 2026:KHC:36317 ORDER [A] The petition is allowed quashing the Appellate Authority's order dated 20.02.2026 restoring the proceedings for reconsideration.

[B] The petitioner shall appear with the Appellate Authority without further notice on 22.09.2026 and the Appellate Authority shall dispose of the appeal expeditiously and in any case within three [3] months from the date of first appearance. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

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.