BharatTaxGST

M/S Edge Clothing vs. The Superintendent Of Central Tax

Original PDF →
WP/2979/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01007477202603 February 2026Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. SANDEEP HUILGOL., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. ARAVIND CHAVAN., ADVOCATE

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6108 WP No. 2979 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 2979 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S EDGE CLOTHING A SOLE PROPRIETARY CONCERN REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR MR. ARJUN BHANDARI AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS SON OF MR. LAKSHMIKANTH BHANDARI NO. 511-6A, EMBASSY WOODS CUNNINGHAM ROAD, VASANTHANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 027. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANDEEP HUILGOL., ADVOCATE) AND: THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX ASD-1 RANGE, DIVISION-1 BENGALURU SOUTH COMMISSIONERATE 1 1ST FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING KANAKPURA ROAD, BANASHANKARI BANGALORE - 560 070. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ARAVIND CHAVAN., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN ORIGINAL DATED 30/10/2025 BEARING NO. 36/ GST/2025-26/ADS-1/SUPDT, FILE NO. GEXCOM/SCN/GST/ Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6108 WP No. 2979 of 2026 11379/2024-CGST-RANGE-ASD1-DIV-SD-1-COMMRTE- BENGALURU (S) DIN:20251054YU000081388D PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 74 OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 FOR THE TAX PERIODS 01.04.2018 TO 31.03.2019 (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

ORAL ORDER

Sri. Aravind Chavan, learned counsel accepts notice for respondents. With the consent of both parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

2.

Petitioner has challenged the validity of the order in original at Annexure-A.

3.

It is the case of the petitioner that the order passed is an ex parte order and the notice stated to have been issued was sent to the address of the principal place of business though the registration itself was cancelled with effect from 07.08.2019 and petitioner had closed down his office in the principal place of business. It is HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6108 submitted that the notice issued during the year 2024 has not been served as the office was closed in the year 2019 itself.

4.

Sri. Aravind Chavan, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the notice would be sent to the address available in the registration records and there was no other way to ascertain the address of the petitioner.

5.

Petitioner further submits that even on merits he has information to be placed before the assessing officer which would meet the show cause notice. Taking note that admittedly order passed is an ex parte order and also noticing the cancellation of registration suo motu with effect from 07.08.2019 and that the notice was issued in the year 2024 and that such notice would not have been served in light of assertion of the petitioner that principal place of business was closed, case is made out for interference. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6108

6.

Accordingly, the order at Annexure-A is set aside and the matter is remitted to the stage of reply to the show cause notice dated 07.09.2024. Petitioner to appear without further notice before the respondent on 23.02.2026. Needless to state the petitioner to be furnished with copy of show cause notice forthwith to enable the petitioner to make out reply to the show cause notice. All contentions are kept open.

7.

Writ petition is accordingly 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.