M/S Lubna Steel Traders vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Tax
Held
The Court set aside the ex-parte adjudication order and remitted the matter back to the respondent. The petitioner was granted an opportunity to submit a reply to the show cause notice and contest the proceedings.
Facts
The petitioner did not submit a reply to notices issued under GST ASMT-10 and DRC-01A, nor to a show cause notice under Section 74(1). Consequently, an ex-parte adjudication order was passed. The petitioner claimed non-receipt of notices due to bonafide reasons.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte adjudication order passed without the petitioner's reply and participation is sustainable, and if the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to contest the proceedings.
Sections Cited
Section 61, Section 74(1), Section 74(9)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.