Shri. Kalyanam Jayadeep vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs:
"(a) Issue Writ of Certiorari thereby quashing and setting aside the Pre-Intimation Notice dated 12.11.2024 issued under Section 73(5) of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017, along with the corresponding Summary of Pre-Intimation in Form GST DRC-01A bearing Reference No. ZD2911240411725, issued by Respondent No.1, which is produced at ANNEXURE-C; HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51898 (b) Issue a Writ of Certiorari thereby quashing and setting aside the Show Cause Notice dated 20.11.2024 issued under Section 73(1) of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017, along with the corresponding Summary Show Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01 bearing Reference No. ZD291124093739U, Issued by Respondent No.1, which is produced at ANNEXURE-D;
(c) Issue Writ of Certiorari thereby quashing and setting aside the Order-in-Original dated 27.02.2025 passed under Section 73(9) of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017, along with the consequential Summary of Demand in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Reference No. ZD290225111216Q, issued by Respondent No.1, which is produced at ANNEXURE-E;
(d) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring that the initiation, conduct and culmination of proceedings by Respondents, i.e., an officers functioning under the State GST Department, against the Petitioner whose GST registration stands under the exclusive administrative control of the Central GST Authorities, are without juri iction, being contrary to the statutory framework governing administrative assignment of GSTINs, and ultra vires the scope of cross- empowerment under Section 6 of the CGST/KGST Acts, as the proceedings are not founded upon any intelligence- based enforcement action but are based entirely on return- based discrepancy analysis and data comparison, which lie solely within the competence of the juri ictional Central authorities; and consequently hold that all actions, notices HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51898 and orders issued by Respondent No.1 are void ab initio and unenforceable in law;
(e) To grant such other relief as the Hon'ble court may deem fit in the interest of justice and equity."
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record.
A perusal of material on record would indicate that respondent No.1 issued a show-cause notice dated 20.11.2024 under Section 73(1) of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017. Since the petitioner did not submit his reply to the said show-cause notice, respondent No.1 proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 27.02.2025 under Section 73(9) of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017 confirming the total demand of Rs.19,57,657/- including the tax, interest and penalty.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said notices were not received by the petitioner and hence could not submit replies/ documents to the show-cause notice dated 20.11.2024 and resultantly could not contest the proceedings. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner having no option has approached this Court by way of the present petition interalia HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51898 contending that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit a reply to the pre-intimation notice and show- cause notice and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and submits that if one more opportunity is provided, by setting aside the impugned order, the petitioner would submit a reply to the show-cause notice and contest the proceedings.
Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Though several contentions have been urged by both sides, having regard to the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to submit replies and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, I deem it just and appropriate to adopt a justice oriented approach and provide one more opportunity to the petitioner by setting aside the impugned order dated 27.02.2025 at Annexure-E and remitting the matter back to the respondents for reconsideration of the matter afresh in HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51898 accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting reply to the impugned show-cause notice dated 20.11.2024. 7. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER
(i) The petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 27.02.2025 (Adjudication order) passed by respondent No.1 under Section 73(9) of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017 at Annexure–E is hereby set-aside subject to the petitioner paying a cost of Rs.10,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Authority.
(iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting its reply to the notice dated 20.11.2024 at Annexure-D.
(iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent No.1 on 19.01.2026 without awaiting further notice from respondent No.1. (v) The liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit replies, documents etc., which shall be considered by the first respondent who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51898 and hear them and proceed further in accordance with law.
(vi) In the event, the Petitioner does not appear before respondent No.1 on 19.01.2026 as stated supra, present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
NBM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10
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.