BharatTaxGST

Ptp Perpetual Technology PVT LTD vs. Assistant Commissioner Of

Original PDF →
WP/18152/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01039885202623 June 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. PRANAAV G AMBEKAR, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI K HEMA KUMAR, AGA
AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The petitioner challenged an adjudication order issued under Section 73 of the GST Act for the tax period April 2021 to March 2022, asserting that it was passed without due notice. The petitioner claimed exemption for 'export of services' and sought an opportunity to produce supporting documents.

Held

The High Court quashed the impugned adjudication order, agreeing that the petitioner's grievance of lack of proper notice warranted another opportunity. The proceedings were restored to the respondent for reconsideration, granting the petitioner liberty to file a written response with all documents.

Key Issues

The key legal issue was whether an adjudication order passed without proper notice to the assessee, thereby denying an opportunity to present documents, violated principles of natural justice and warranted reconsideration.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 61, Section 50

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31054 WP No. 18152 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 18152 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: PTP PERPETUAL TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, 179/2, GVR IKON, C-6, 10TH A MAIN ROAD, DOUBLE ROAD, INDIRANAGAR 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560038 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SRI. SATYADEEP RAJAN, SON OF SRI. LATE S.S. RAJAN, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRANAAV G AMBEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, LGSTO-046, 174, RAKSHITHA COMPLEX, 9TH CROSS, 1ST STAGE, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31054 WP No. 18152 of 2026 INDIRANAGAR, 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

I. QUASHING THE ELECTRONICALLY ISSUED ORDER- IN-ORIGINAL ISSUED FOR THE TAX PERIOD APRIL 2021 TO MARCH 2022 UNDER SECTION 73(9) OF THE KGST ACT R/W SECTION 61 AND 50 OF CGST ACT DATED 01.12.2025 BEARING NO. ACCT/LGSTO-46/ADJ/T ALONG WITH THE SUMMARY IN FORM GST DRC-07 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT, THE SAME ARE ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE A; II. QUASHING THE ELECTRONICALLY ISSUED SCN ISSUED FOR THE TAX PERIOD APRIL 2021 TO MARCH 2022 UNDER SECTION 73 OF THE KGST ACT DATED 02.09.2025 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BEARING REFERENCE NO. ZD2909250102141 ALONG WITH THE SUMMARY OF SCN IN DRC 01 DATED 02.09.2025 AND THE SAME ARE ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE B; III. QUASHING THE PHYSICALLY SIGNED NOTICE OF RECOVERY IN FORM GST DRC-13 DATED 07.05.2026 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AND THE SAME IS ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE C AND ETC.

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 NC: 2026:KHC:31054 ORAL ORDER

The petitioner's grievance is with the Adjudication Order dated 01.12.2025 [Annexure-A] under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act/Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short, 'the Act']. The Adjudication Order is for the tax period is April 2021 to March 2022. The petitioner's grievance with this order is pivoted on the assertion that it is without due notice.

2.

Sri Pranaav G Ambekar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, relying upon the Order dated 10.06.2026 [Annexure-E] submits [a] that the scrutiny proceedings under Section 61 of the Act were commenced for the financial year 2022-23 and when explanation with all the documents are filed, they are found tenable and proceedings have been dropped; [b] that if another opportunity is extended, the petitioner will produce documents to demonstrate once again that there cannot be any justification for HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31054 the continuance of the proceedings under Section 73 of the Act.

3.

Sri K Hemakumar, a learned Additional Government Advocate who is called upon to accept notice for the respondent, is heard. The learned Additional Government Advocate points out that the petitioner claims exemption from Goods and Services Tax asserting ‘export of services’, but did not produce any documents when called for.

4.

However, this Court must observe that the petitioner's case on the lack of opportunity hinges on the assertion that the Notice is not served otherwise apart from being uploaded on the portal. Perhaps the petitioner can persuade the Authorities to consider the copies of the documents including a Letter of Undertaking that can be filed even at this stage to justify its claim of 'export of services' and that there would be no justification for the conclusion of the proceedings under Section 73 of the Act. In the HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31054 circumstances, this Court opines that there must be another opportunity interfering with the impugned Order of Adjudication dated 01.12.2025 [Annexure-A].

Hence the following. ORDER [a] The petition is allowed.

[b] The impugned Adjudication Order dated 01.12.2025 [Annexure-A] is quashed restoring the proceedings to the respondent for reconsideration with liberty to the petitioner to file response in writing with all documents with the respondent by 27.07.2026 without further notice. (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.