Saibya Homes LLP vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: SHRI SHASHAANK SHEKHAR
Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondent.
The petitioner has called in question the correctness of the order of Adjudication dated 18.09.2025, at Annexure-A. The petitioner has challenged the applicability of GST on transfer of development rights, and has placed reliance on the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Shrinivasa Realcon Pvt.Ltd versus Deputy Commissioner Anti- HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7856 Evasion Branch, CGST & Central Excise, Nagapur, (2025) 29 Centax 298 (Bombay).
It is submitted that the Authority has merely refused to record a finding on the observations made in the above referred judgment and its applicability in the present case on the mere ground that, it was passed by a Court outside the juri iction.
Learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that the authority has referred to the judgment of the Bombay High Court and then passed an order and the appropriate remedy is to file an appeal.
Heard learned counsel on both sides.
It is noticed that, appeal remedy now is technically not available as the limitation has run out. Perused the order of the Adjudicating Authority. The contention of the petitioner regarding applicability of Goods and Service Tax(GST) on transfer of development rights by placing reliance on the judgment of the Bombay High Court has not been referred to on its merits. Even otherwise, when a judgment on an identical HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7856 issue is placed before the authority as a matter of principle of law the Adjudicating Authority ought to have examined the principle laid down and then decided whether the said principle would be applicable or not.
We find that the authority has disengaged with the contention raised by not applying its mind to the principle as has emanated from the judgment of the Bombay High Court as canvassed by the petitioner.
Accordingly, on such sole ground, the order at Annexure-A is set aside. The matter is remitted to the Authority to reconsider the issue as well as applicability of the principle laid down by the Bombay High Court in the case of Shrinivasa Realcon Pvt.Ltd supra.
Petitioner to pay 10% of the tax demanded.
Petitioner to appear before the respondent on 26.02.2026 without further notice. Deposit of 10% of tax to be made within a period of two(2) weeks. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7856
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. All contentions are kept open. (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE HR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 21
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.