BharatTaxGST

The Supreintendent Of Central Tax. vs. Prls Ashika

Original PDF →
WA/1022/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01022714202624 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 show cause notices and Orders-in-Original issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act. The respondents had filed a writ petition challenging these notices and orders, which the Single Judge allowed.

Held

The High Court allowed the Revenue's appeal, setting aside the Single Judge's order and restoring the show cause notices and Orders-in-Original. It granted the respondents six weeks to file a statutory appeal, directing the appellate authority to consider it on merits without raising limitation.

Key Issues

The key issue was the validity of the Single Judge's order quashing show cause notices and orders-in-original issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act, and whether the respondents should be relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.

Sections Cited

Section 74

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Heard together (2 matters)

WA No. 1022 of 2026
WP NO.12213/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23117-DB WA No. 1022 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. 1022 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX., OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX (GST), VIRAJPET RANGE, NO.05, SRI GANAPATHY ARCADE, MAIN ROAD, FMC ROAD, VIRAJPET-571253. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ARAVIND V CHAVAN, ADV.) AND: 1. PRLS ASHIKA WIFE OF ABDUL HALEEM AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS ALITOPOO GROUP OF ESTATES, SIDDAPURA, KODAGU-571253. 2. FATHIMA HAMEED MUSTHAFA WIFE OF HAMEED MUSTHAFA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, ALITOPOO GROUP OF ESTATES, SIDDAPURA, KODAGU-571253. 3. ABOOBUCKER MANSOORA WIFE OF JALALKHAN AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, ALITOPOO GROUP OF ESTATES, SIDDAPURA, KODAGU-571253. 4. SHAHINA DAUGHTER OF JAMIR MOHIDEEN Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23117-DB WA No. 1022 of 2026 AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, ALITOPOO GROUP OF ESTATES, SIDDAPURA, KODAGU-571253. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VENKATESH G., ADV.) 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 WP NO.12213/2025 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.12213/2025 where under the respondent’s writ petition is allowed quashing the common show cause notices issued under Sections 74 of the CGST Act dated 26.07.2024, 25.07.2024, 26.07.2024 and 26.07.2024 at Annexures A2, B2, C2 and D2, respectively and Orders-in- HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23117-DB Original all dated 23.01.2025 at Annexures A1, B1, C1 and D1, respectively.

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 would aptly apply to the present appeal also. Since the Order-in- Original is passed in pursuance to the show cause notice under Section 74 of the Act, we deem it appropriate to provide liberty to the respondent 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 HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23117-DB appellate authority shall consider the same on merits without raising the plea of limitation.

3.

Hence, the following: ORDER (i) Writ appeal is allowed.

(ii) The order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 17.12.2025 in W.P.No.12213/2025 is set aside.

(iii) The Orders-in-Original all dated 23.01.2025 at Annexures A1, B1, C1 and D1, respectively are restored and show cause notices dated 26.07.2024, 25.07.2024, 26.07.2024 and 26.07.2024 at Annexures A2, B2, C2 and D2, respectively 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. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23117-DB (v) If the respondent files appeal within the period stated above, the appellants/Revenue shall not raise the question of limitation.

(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.: 37

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.