BharatTaxGST

Sri Paramesh Ramappa vs. The Assisstant Commissioner Of

Original PDF →
WP/412/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01001143202613 January 2026Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. ANNAMALAI S., 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:1867 WP No. 412 of 2026 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. 412 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI PARAMESH RAMAPPA SON OF RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, CIVIL WORKS CONTRACTOR NALLURU, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, 4 DAVANGERE - 577 213 … PETITIONER (BY SRI. ANNAMALAI S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)-1 ROOM NO.112, VANIJYA TERIGE BHAVANA A BLOCK, DEVARAJ URS LAYOUT, P B ROAD, DAVANGERE-570 006 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ENF) VANIJYA TERIGE BHAVANA DEVARAJ URS BADAVANE A BLOCK, P.B ROAD DAVANGERE-570 006 … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. JYOTHI M. MARADI, HCGP) Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1867 WP No. 412 of 2026 THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO 1) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OR CERTIORARI QUASHING THE ORDER OF ADJUDICATION PASSED UNDER SECTION 73(9) OF THE GST ACT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED 05.12.2025 FOR THE PERIOD APRIL 2021 TO MARCH 2022 BEARING NO. ACCT(ADULT- 1)/DVG/T-447/2025-26 HEREIN MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A1 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

Petitioner has called in question the validity of the order-of-adjudication passed under Section 73(9) read with Section 50(1) of the Karnataka Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 dated 05.12.2025 for the period April, 2021 to March, 2022. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that 'Form GST DRC-01A', which is an intimation of tax ascertained, came to be issued on 06.09.2025 providing an opportunity of ten days to pay the tax amount along with interest, failing which show cause notice would be issued under Section 73(1) of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017. It was further stated HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1867 that the assessee could file any submissions against the said ascertainment. In the meanwhile, show cause notice came to be issued in "Form GST DRC-01" at Annexure-B1 on 10.09.2025 within the period of 10 days prescribed. Accordingly, it is submitted that the adjudication order passed pursuant to the notice at Annexure-B1 is in violation of principles of natural justice and the same requires to be set aside and the matter be remanded for fresh consideration to the stage of reply to the intimation in 'Form GST DRC-01A'.

3.

Learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the urgency shown to complete the proceedings is in light of statutory limitation and the petitioner was in fact responsible for prolonging the matter till such stage.

4.

Without entering into the merits of the contentions so as to who was responsible for the matter being concluded hastily, taking note of the time that was HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1867 stipulated to make out reply as regards 'Form GST DRC- 01A', it would meet the ends of justice by setting aside the adjudication order at Annexure-A1; summary order at Annexure-A2 as well as the notices at Annexures-B1 and B2. 5. The matter is remitted to the stage of reply to be made out to the pre-consultation notice in 'Form GST DRC-01A' dated 06.09.2025. Such reply to be filed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. Upon such reply being filed, needless to state, the authorities could proceed to conclude the proceedings as per law. In the event not being satisfied with the reply to 'Form GST DRC-01A' and the Authority were to proceed to issue 'Form GST-DRC-01', the assessee cannot raise the aspect of limitation for conclusion of proceedings as the present order is being passed only at the instance of the petitioner to afford him sufficient opportunity. Petitioner to pay cost of Rs.15,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Authority. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:1867

6.

Accordingly, petition is disposed of. All contentions are kept open. (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.