Sri. A.S. Sampath Kumar vs. State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner faced GST demands for the periods 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 based on TDS statements for work contract services, arguing these services were rendered prior to the GST regime and thus no returns were filed. Adjudication orders had already been passed alleging deliberate omission, which the petitioner sought to have treated under Section 73 instead of Section 74.
Held
The High Court found no deliberate omission or suppression, as the petitioner was willing to offer taxes. It directed the second respondent to treat the impugned assessment orders as orders under Section 73 of the CGST Act/KGST Act, thereby entitling the petitioner to avail the benefit of the Scheme under Section 128A.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was whether existing GST adjudication orders, passed alleging deliberate omission, could be re-characterized as orders under Section 73 to enable the petitioner to benefit from the newly introduced Section 128A amnesty scheme.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 128A, Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
The question for consideration is whether this Court must permit adjudication under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/ Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28102 short, the 'CGST Act/KGST Act'] so that the pet itioner can avail the benefit of the Scheme under Section 128A of the CGST Act/KGST Act as introduced by the Finance Act, 2024. The petitioner's case is that the adjudication is based on the TDS deducted by the different State Government Organizations for whom the petitioner has executed Work Contract Services for the period prior to the GST regime and the petitioner has not filed returns because of the understanding that he would not be liable to pay any GST for the services rendered prior to the GST Regime.
Sri Raghavendra B. Hanjer, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that though the show cause notices are issued alleging deliberate omission and there are concluded adjudication orders based on those show cause notices, this Court may consider directing the second respondent to pass orders to treat these impugned adjudication orders to HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28102 be orders under Section 73 [instead of Section 74] of the CGST Act/KGST Act as that would entitle the petitioner to claim the benefit of the Scheme under Section 128A of the CGST Act/KGST Act in terms of the timelines notified vide Notification No.21/2024 dated 08.10.2024. 3. Sri K. Hema Kumar, the learned Additional Government Advocate, is heard in the light of this request. The learned Additional Government Advocate invites this Court's attention to the import of the expression 'suppression' as found in Explanation-II appended to Section 74 of the CGST Act/KGST Act. The question for consideration is whether the petitioner, who is willing to offer taxes, should be allowed the benefit of waiver of interest and penalty notwithstanding his case that the returns are filed without disclosing the liability only because the services were rendered prior to the GST regime. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28102
This Court must observe that the subject receipts are not part of the petitioner's Returns. This Court is persuaded to opine that there is no deliberate omission or suppression, and because the petitioner is willing to offer taxes subject to the benefit of the claim, this Court is also of the view that the petition must be disposed of calling upon the second respondent to pass orders treating the impugned Order to be Order under Section 73 of the CGST Act/KGST Act. As such, the impugned Assessment Orders - Annexures - D1, E1 and F1 are read as Orders under Section 73 of the CGST Act/KGST Act with the petitioner being entitled to file applications in terms of the Notification dated 08.10.2024. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE NV
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.