M/S Strta Consulting Services PVT. vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
M/s Strta Consulting Services Pvt. Ltd. challenged an order and summary (DRC-07) issued under Section 73 for the 2018-19 tax period. The petitioner contended that the Show Cause Notice (DRC-01) was not properly served, denying them an opportunity to explain GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B mismatches.
Held
The High Court quashed the impugned order and summary, finding that the petitioner was not properly served with the notice and was denied a reasonable opportunity to present documents as per the Circular dated 27.12.2022. The proceedings were restored for fresh consideration.
Key Issues
The key issue was the validity of an assessment order passed under Section 73 when the taxpayer alleged non-service of the show cause notice and denial of a reasonable opportunity to explain GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B mismatches.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Form GST DRC-07, Form DRC-01, Circular dated 27.12.2022
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has called in question the Order dated 17.02.2024 [Annexure-A] and the summary of such order dated 18.02.2024 [Annexure-A1] under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short, the 'CGST/KGST Act']. Sri Bharath Kumar V., the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that: [a] this Court must intervene on the ground of lack of opportunity and in elaboration the learned counsel submits that the adjudication is on the basis that the Show Cause Notice and Form DRC-01 HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29728 dated 18.12.2023 are served on the petitioner through the registered email but it cannot be disputed that the petitioner is not served with such notice over email, and [b] the petitioner can draw support from the fact that the show cause notice is not uploaded on the portal nor sent under Speed Post or otherwise to the petitioner's address.
On merits, Sri Bharath Kumar V submits that the proceedings are initiated for the mismatch between GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B for the tax period 2018-19, but in terms of the Circular dated 27.12.2022 it would be open for the petitioner to produce documents as contemplated therein to explain the mismatch and that with the petitioner not being given a reasonable opportunity, it has not been able to produce such documents. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29728 Sri K. Hema Kumar, the learned Additional Government Advocate, who accepts notice for the respondent, is heard for the disposal of the petition. This Court must opine that the assertion that the petitioner is not served with notice is not seriously contested as is the petitioner's case that if an opportunity is extended the petitioner can produce documents as mentioned in the Circular dated 27.12.2022. This Court, in these circumstances, opines that there must be intervention with the Order dated 17.02.2024 [Annexure-A] and the summary of such Order dated 18.02.2024 [Annexure-A1] to restore the proceedings with opportunity to the petitioner to file response along with the documents within a timeline. In the light of the afore, the following ORDER
The petition is allowed-in-part quashing the impugned Order dated 17.02.2024 HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29728 [Annexure-A] and the summary of such Order dated 18.02.2024 [Anneuxre-A1] and restoring the proceedings to the respondent calling upon the petitioner to appear without further notice on 20.07.2026 with the respondent and produce all documents on such date or further time as may be allowed on such date. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE NV List No.: 3 Sl No.: 1
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.