BharatTaxGST

M/S Hardcore Securitys vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/3739/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01007669202625 February 2026Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. GOWRISHANKAR PRASAD H R., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. HEMAKUMAR, AGA

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11679 WP No. 3739 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 3739 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S HARDCORE SECURITYS NO.301, 3RD FLOOR, NO.20, 5TH CROSS, OUTER RING ROAD, PAPAREDDY PALYA, BENGALURU-560 072 REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERNED SRI YELAGALAVADI VENKATESH CHANDRAMOULESHA S/O. VENKATESH, R/O. NO. 406, 16TH CROSS, NEAR AMMA ASHRAMA ARCH, NAGADEANAHALLLY, ULLALU UPANAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 056 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. GOWRISHANKAR PRASAD H R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, VANIJYA TERIGE KARYALAYA, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 009 Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11679 WP No. 3739 of 2026 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AUDIT-2.4 DGSTO-02, 1ST FLOOR, PIONEER PLAZA, KENCHENAHALLI MAIN ROAD, OPP. GOPALAN ARCH MALL, OFF MYSURU ROAD, BENGALURU-560 098. 3. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS)-02, ABOVE BMTC BUS STAND, SHANTINAGARA, BENGALURU … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HEMAKUMAR, AGA) *** THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO (A) QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ADJUDICATION ORDER BEARING NO. 50/2023- 24, CONSEQUENTIAL COMPUTER GENERATED ORDER UNDER SEC. 73 AND SUMMARY ORDER IN FORM GST DRC-07, BEARING REFERENCE NO. ZD2903240846922 ALL DATED 30- 03-2024 (ANNEXURES-B, C AND D) PASSED BY THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AUDIT-2.4, BENGALURU, THE 2ND RESPONDENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2018-19 AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR FRESH MATTERS LIST THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11679 WP No. 3739 of 2026

ORAL ORDER Petitioner has called in question the validity of the order of adjudication at Annexure-B and the summary orders at Annexures-C and D.

2.

It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the petitioner had participated in the proceedings, due to incomplete presentation of the petitioner's case before the authority, the authority has concluded the proceedings raising the demand. It is submitted that if the petitioner is given an opportunity to appear before the Authority, the petitioner would make out their case that the services which have been adjudicated as being taxable, are in fact exempt.

3.

Reliance is placed on the notification No.12/2017 - Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 and in specific to Entry-66, "Heading 9992". It is further submitted that the Authority has recovered taxes amounting to Rs.38,05,355/- and there has been further HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11679 recovery as well. Petitioner further submits that the mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B would be reconciled, if an opportunity is provided

4.

Sri. Hemakumar, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the amount of recovery is a matter of record and to be verified.

5.

Taking note of the assertions of the petitioner regarding exemption claimed by relying on notification dated 28.06.2017 and noticing that the Authority has passed an order which according to the petitioner would not have been passed if the petitioner had placed materials such as invoices at the appropriate point of time, and taking note that there has been substantial recovery of tax, it would be appropriate to enable the petitioner to take a stand on merits as noticed from the assertions referred to above.

6.

Accordingly, the order of adjudication at Annexure-B and the summary orders at Annexures-C and HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:11679 D are set aside. The matter is remitted for fresh consideration before respondent No. 2. 7. Petitioner to appear before respondent No. 2 without fresh notice on 24.03.2026. 8. Needless to state, if the petitioner were to be absent or not take the benefit of participation in the proceedings on the date fixed, the indulgence granted by the Court would stand revoked. The amount of tax recovered would be subject to adjudication which is directed to be redone. All contentions are kept open.

9.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP

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.