M/S. Loyal Furniture And Interiors vs. The Commercial Tax Officer, Taxes (Audit)-4.7
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner challenged an ex-parte assessment order passed under Section 73 due to non-response, and a subsequent Order-in-Appeal that dismissed the appeal on grounds of limitation. The petitioner's proprietor claimed he could not participate in proceedings or file the appeal on time due to a serious heart condition and the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Held
The High Court found sufficient reason for the petitioner's inability to participate and the delay in filing the appeal, considering the proprietor's medical condition and pandemic restrictions. It quashed both the original assessment order and the appellate order, restoring the proceedings to the first respondent for fresh consideration after allowing the petitioner to file a response and documents.
Key Issues
Whether an ex-parte assessment order and a time-barred appeal dismissal should be set aside when the taxpayer's proprietor faced serious medical issues and pandemic-related difficulties preventing participation and timely appeal.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER TO QUASH/SET- ASIDE THE ANNEXURE B ORDER DATED 24-02-2026 (ORDER NO. ZD2902261227749) PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT; TO LIFT THE FREEZING OF THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE PETITIONER HELD AT FEDERAL BANK, IRITTY BRANCH, ACCOUNT NO. 14580200007263, IFSC - FDRL0001458. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26143 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has called in question an order under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act/Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for short, 'CGST/KGST Act'] which is dated 26.03.2024, and the Order-in-Appeal dated 24.02.2026 in GST. AP. No. 458/25-26. The first Order is in the light of the fact that the petitioner has failed to file a response or appear for a personal hearing, and the Order-in-appeal is on the ground of limitation. The tax period is from April 2018 to March 2019. The petitioner has produced a Discharge Summary to substantiate its case.
The petitioner’s representative could not participate in the proceedings under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act because he was suffering from triple vessel disease. Ms. Mary Savitha, the learned counsel for the petitioner, while relying upon these HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26143 circumstances, submits that the petitioner has made out a case for this Court's interference and to restore the proceedings to the first respondent for due consideration with an opportunity to produce documentary evidence because immediately after the discharge there was onset of COVID-19 pandemic.
Mr. K. Hema Kumar, the learned Additional Government Advocate who is called upon to accept notice for the respondents, is heard. While this Court may not take exception with the Appellate Authority dismissing the appeal on the ground of limitation because the appeal is delayed by 276 days beyond the condonable period, this Court must also consider the circumstances brought out as indisputable and the just fallout from this.
It is shown to this Court's satisfaction that during the relevant time the petitioner’s representative had a heart condition; that he has availed treatment in his native place at Kerala and HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26143 that there were difficulties with restrictions because of the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. As such, this Court opines that sufficient reasons are made out for interference but to the limited extent of restoring the proceedings to the first respondent with liberty to the petitioner to file a response and documents, calling upon the first respondent to consider and pass just Orders under law. In the light of the afore, the following: ORDER
[A] The Order dated 26.03.2024 [Annexure - A] and the Order-in-Appeal dated 24.02.2026 [Annexure - B] are quashed restoring the proceedings to the first respondent with liberty to the petitioner to file his response and list of documents.
[B] The petitioner shall file such response by 30.06.2026 and the first respondent is HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26143 called upon to consider all materials and pass just orders. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE
RB
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.