BharatTaxGST

The Deputy Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S. Bluemoon Service Station

Original PDF →
WA/899/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01019367202624 April 2026Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND5 pages
For Respondent: SRI. VENKATESH G., ADV
AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The Revenue appealed against a Single Judge's order that quashed a common show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act and the subsequent Order-in-Original. The Single Judge had allowed the respondent's writ petition.

Held

The High Court Division Bench allowed the Revenue's appeal, setting aside the Single Judge's order and restoring the show cause notice and Order-in-Original. It granted the respondent six weeks to file a statutory appeal, directing the appellate authority to hear it on merits without considering limitation.

Key Issues

The key legal issue was the permissibility of a consolidated/common show cause notice under Section 74 of the CGST Act. The Court also addressed whether the respondent should be relegated to a statutory appeal despite pursuing a writ petition.

Sections Cited

Section 74, Section 4

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24636-DB WA No. 899 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT APPEAL NO. 899 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX MYSURU RURAL DIVISION, S1 AND S2, GST BHAWAN, SIDDARTHA LAYOUT, VINAYA MARG, MYSURU-570011. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX MYSURU AUDIT CIRCLE-2, MYSURU AUDIT COMMISSIONERATE, 2ND FLOOR, VINAYA MARGA, SIDDARTHA NAGAR, MYSURU-570011. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. ARAVIND V CHAVAN, ADV.) AND: M/S. BLUEMOON SERVICE STATION A PARTNERSHIP FIRM UNDER THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932 REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI H S ASHOK S/O LATE H K SURESH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, B M ROAD, KUSHALNAGAR-571 234. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. VENKATESH G., ADV.) Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24636-DB WA No. 899 of 2026 THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO A) SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN PW NO.18673/2025 DATED 17/12/2025 AND B) PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDERS. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

This Writ Appeal by the Revenue under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act is directed against the learned Single Judge’s order dated 17.12.2025 in W.P.No.18673/2025 where under the respondent’s writ petition is allowed quashing the common show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act dated 19.09.2024 and Order-in-Original dated 26.03.2025. 2. This Court by order dated 24.04.2026 in W.A.No.1751/2024 and Connected Appeals, allowed the Writ Appeals and restored the show cause notice and Orders in Original. The decision rendered therein HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24636-DB would aptly apply to these appeals also. Since we have held that the consolidated/common show cause notice is permissible, and since the Orders-in-Original impugned in the impugned Writ Petition was quashed in pursuance to the common show cause notice under Section 74 of the Act, we deem it appropriate to provide liberty to the respondents herein to file statutory appeal within the time to be prescribed by this Court. Having regard to the limited power vested in the appellate authority to condone the delay, coupled with the fact that the respondent had been diligently pursuing the remedy by way of writ petition, we deem it appropriate, while relegating the respondent to the statutory remedy of appeal, to grant six weeks' time to file such appeal. If such appeal is filed within the time granted hereinabove, the appellate authority shall consider the same on merits without raising the plea of limitation.

3.

Hence, the following: HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24636-DB ORDER (i) Writ appeal is allowed.

(ii) The order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 17.12.2025 in W.P.No.18673/2025 is set aside.

(iii) The Order-in-Original dated 26.03.2025 is restored and show cause notice dated 19.09.2024 also stands restored.

(iv) The respondent is provided six weeks time from the day this Order is uploaded on the website of this Court to avail the remedy of statutory appeal.

(v) If the respondent files appeal within the period stated above, the appellants/Revenue shall not raise the question of limitation. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:24636-DB (vi) The Appellate Authority also shall hear the appeal on merits, if the appeal is filed within the time stated above. (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE

MPK CT:bms List No.: 2 Sl No.: 0

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.