Klr Constructions vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes - Karnataka High Court, 01 July 2026

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32601 WP No. 16841 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 16841 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: KLR CONSTRUCTIONS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHRI KOVVURI SRINIVAS REDDY SON OF SHRI KOVVURI LATCHA REDDY AGED 55 YEARS, HAVING OFFICE AT GROUND FLOOR SRI SAI LAYOUT EXTENSION JAIN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL TUMKUR-572105 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRADYUMNA HEJIB., ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32601 WP No. 16841 of 2026 LOCAL GST OFFICE-170 VANIJYA TERIGE SANKEERNA NEAR SUKRUTHA HOSPITAL SIDDARAMESHWARA EXTENSION TUMKUR-572103 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. K. HEMA KUMAR, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ADJUDICATION

ORDER ADJUDICATION ORDER BEARING NO. ACCT/LGSTO-170/ADJ.ORDER/2024-25 DTD. 20.02.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT (ANNX- A).

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32601 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the Adjudication Order dated 20.02.2025 [Annexure-A] which records the petitioner's response and the impermissibility of such request in the following terms: "On receipt of the said notice, the taxpayer has filed a reply letter dated 04-12-2024 through e- mail stating that, there is an excess ITC available in the year 2021-22 to the tune of Rs.16,33,627-00 and requested to adjust the same from the excess ITC available in the year 2021-22. The same is verified and found that, such provisions are not permissible under the KGST Act, 2017 and the CGST Act, 2017."

Mr. Pradyumna Hejib, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner would be entitled for the credit on the invoice dated 17.11.2020 issued by its supplier, M/s. Mani and Sri Associates, but this supplier has uploaded the details of the supply only on 12.04.2021, and that it is in this context that the petitioner has requested the Adjudicating Officer to adjust the Input Tax Credit HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32601 [ITC] available in the year 2021-2022. The learned counsel is categorical in stating that the petitioner has not availed the ITC against the invoice dated 17.11.2020 in the next tax period.

Mr. K. Hema Kumar, the learned Additional Government Advocate rightly emphasizes that there is no provision under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 to adjust excess ITC available in the next tax period, but the learned Additional Government Advocate cannot dispute that if the petitioner has not availed ITC relatable to the invoice dated 17.11.2020 by M/s. Mani and Sri Associates, the petitioner would be entitled to ITC relevant to the tax period. However, this requires a detailed examination by the Adjudicating Authority with the petitioner placing on record all material to show cause against the right to answer the liability. As such, the following. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:32601 ORDER [A] The petition is allowed-in-part quashing the Adjudication Order dated 20.02.2025 [Annexure - A] passed by the respondent but restoring the proceedings for due consideration with liberty to the petitioner to place on record all the details to justify that it has not availed ITC relevant to the invoice dated 17.11.2020 raised by M/s. Mani and Sri Associates in the financial year 2020-2021. [B] The petitioner shall, without further notice, file all the documents with the respondent by 20.08.2026. [C] It is needless to observe that all questions are left open for consideration. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB