BharatTaxGST

Mrs. Jamuna vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)

Original PDF →
WP/38162/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01082538202513 January 2026Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. PRASANNA B R., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SMT. JYOTHI M. MARADI, HCGP

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1950 WP No. 38162 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 38162 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: MRS. JAMUNA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, M/S. ANITHA TRADERS, NO.24/2, ANITHA NIVAS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, HD KOTE-571 114. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRASANNA B R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS) MYSURU DIVISION, SESHADRI BHAVAN, DEEWAN'S ROAD, MYSURU-570024. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES AUDIT (03), MYSURU-570024. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. JYOTHI M. MARADI, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN FORM GST APL-02 DATED 07.04.2025 PASSED BY THE R1, THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1950 WP No. 38162 of 2025 COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS), MYSURU DIVISION, MYSURU VIDE ANNEXURE-F. 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

The petitioner has called in question the correctness of the order at Annexure-F. Annexure-F is the order which would indicate that the appeal would stand rejected in light of "delay in submission of appeal”.

2.

It is the case of the petitioner that such order is not a speaking order. It is submitted that otherwise as well the order of adjudication at Annexure-B is an ex-parte order insofar as petitioner had not filed his reply due to bona-fide reasons. It is submitted that such ex-parte order may be set aside putting the petitioner to terms.

3.

Learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that it is not a case of an ex-parte order insofar as the show cause notice was served and opportunity for HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1950 personal hearing was fixed. It is submitted that petitioner has not availed of the opportunity.

4.

No doubt there is a prima-facie force in the submission of learned HCGP regarding the petitioner being aware of the proceedings. However, it would meet the interest of justice to afford another opportunity for the petitioner to put forth his response to the show cause notice on merits, which would enable proper adjudication.

5.

Accordingly, the order at Annexure-B is set aside. Matter is remitted to the stage of reply to the show- cause notice and such reply to be filed to the show cause notice. Petitioner to appear without further notice before respondent No.2 on 28.01.2026 at 11.30 a.m.

6.

In light of lapse on part of the petitioner, the petitioner to pay cost of Rs.10,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee. All contentions are kept open. Accordingly, the order at Annexure-B is set aside and matter is remitted to the stage as noticed above. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1950

7.

In the event, petitioner does not appear on the day fixed, indulgence granted to the petitioner by way of setting aside the order at Annexure-B would stand revoked. Accordingly, petition is disposed of. (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

MCR

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.