BharatTaxGST

M/S Tumkur Rural And Urban Taluku Mspc. vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax.

Original PDF →
WP/16936/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01036352202609 June 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD6 pages
For Petitioner: SMT. VANI H., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI.ARAVIND V CHAVAN., ADVOCATE

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27444 WP No. 16936 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 16936 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S TUMKUR RURAL AND URBAN TALUKU MSPC., LEGAL NAME TUMKUR RURAL AND URBAN TALUKU MSPC MAHILA SUPPLEMENTARY NUTRITION, PRODUCTION CENTRE A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIEITIES REGISTRATION ACT 1960 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO 10, OPPOSITE R UMESH BUILDING, KUNIGAL ROAD, HOSUR TUMAKURU - 572103 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SMT SHAMANTHAKAMANI G B W/O SRI RANGANTH M AGE ABOUT 51 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VANI H., ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX., BANGALORE NORTH-WEST DIVISION - 5, 67/2, SGR COMPLEX, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27444 WP No. 16936 of 2026 RING ROAD, TUMKUR - 572105. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.ARAVIND V CHAVAN., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (1) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN ORIGINAL BEARING SL NO. 12/2024-25 NWD-5 DATED 23.1.2025 PASSED UNDER SECTION 74 OF THE GST ACT BY THE RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD JULY 2017 TO MARCH 2019 VIDE ANNEXURE F; (II) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPLY, DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AND PASS FRESH ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY TO PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE A & B DATED 25.02.2021 & 19.03.2021; (III) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT TO PERMIT PETITIONER TO WITHDRAW THE APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION VIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO. ARN. AD2904250075328 DATED 2.4.2025 AT ANNEXURE G. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27444 WP No. 16936 of 2026 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is aggrieved by the Adjudication Order dated 23.01.2025 under Section 74 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short, 'the Act']. This order relates to the period between July 2017 and March 2019. The respondent has passed this order on the premise that the petitioner is issued with a Show Cause Notice, but he has not responded to this notice or sought for personal hearing.

2.

The respondent has recorded that the communication was addressed to the petitioner for a personal hearing by speed post and also through registered e-mail and that because the petitioner has not responded, there is no option but to proceed ex parte. Ms. Vani H, the learned counsel for the petitioner, invites this Court's attention to the petitioner's response to the Show Cause Notice dated HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27444

28.04.

2022 and the acknowledgment of receipt thereof to contend that the petitioner has filed a response and that the respondent should have considered this response.

3.

On merits, the learned counsel submits that the Department's Advance Ruling Authority has clarified that ‘Pushti Products’ is assigned HSN Code 1106 and if it is unbranded, it will not attract GST. Ms. Vani argues that this Advance Ruling has not been considered and that the proceedings are concluded classifying the petitioner's product under "HSN 1901" raising a Demand at GST rate 18% with consequential Penalty and Interest. Sri Aravind V Chavan, a learned standing counsel for the respondent, is heard and the records are perused.

4.

Admittedly, the response is filed, and that there is an error in recording that the response is not filed. Therefore, there must be interference to restore HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27444 the proceedings to the respondent to reconsider extending an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. At this stage, Ms Vani H submits that, on her advice, a rectification application has been presented, but that has not been registered and this Court may, because the application has not been registered, observe that the petitioner will be at liberty to withdraw the application. In the light of the afore, the following:

ORDER

[a] The petition is allowed-in-part quashing the Adjudication Order dated 23.01.2025 [Annexure-F] restoring the proceedings for due consideration.

[b] The respondent is called upon to extend an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and then complete the adjudication proceedings. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27444 [c] The petitioner is reserved with liberty to withdraw the application for rectification in the light of this order.

[d] The petitioner will be at liberty to file a certified copy of this order with the respondent for due compliance. (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.