D3 Estate And Constructions INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/8845/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01018107202528 November 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. BALRAM R RAO, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. K. HEMA KUMAR, AGA

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49685 WP No. 8845 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.8845 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: D3 ESTATE AND CONSTRUCTIONS INDIA PVT. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS NO.2372, MUKUT, HAL 2ND STAGE, KONENA AGRAHARA, BANGALORE – 560 007. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. BALRAM R RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT) 5.3, DGSTO-5, V.T.K-2 ROOM NO.506. 5TH FLOOR, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE – 560 047. 2. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (A)-5 1ST FLOOR, SHANTHINAGAR BUS STAND WILSON GARDEN, BANGALORE – 560 027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. HEMA KUMAR, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR SUBMISSION OF THE APPEAL IN FORM GST APL-02 DTD 06.09.2024 ENCLOSED AS ANNX-H ISSUED BY THE R-2 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49685 WP No. 8845 of 2025

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “a) Issue a writ or order in the nature of certiorari for quashing the acknowledgement for submission of the appeal in Form GST APL-02 dated 06-09-2024 enclosed as Annexure H, issued by the 2nd Respondent;

b) Issue a writ or order in the nature of mandamus, directing the 2nd Respondent to admit the appeal dated 01.08.2024 filed by the Petitioner u/s.107(1) and enclosed herewith as Annexure - F, and adjudicate the same on merits.

c) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble High Court may think fit including the costs of this Writ Petition.”

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3.

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that pursuant to the proceedings initiated by respondent No.1 under Section 73 of the KGST Act, respondent No.1 passed an adjudication order dated 29.02.2024. However, the said adjudication order passed against the petitioner was not uploaded in the GST portal, in which the respondent No.1 uploaded an adjudication order belonging to one more person i.e., M/s. Sarc Instruments, as a result of which, the petitioner was not aware of HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49685 the impugned adjudication order till he came to know about the same only on 02.05.2024 pursuant to which, the petitioner filed an appeal before respondent No.2 – Appellate Authority on 01.08.2024 within the prescribed period of three months as contemplated under Section 107(1) of the KGST Act. In this context, it is submitted that despite the petitioner having not been communicated with the copy of the impugned order and same having been communicated only on 02.05.2024, the Appellate Authority committed an error in passing the impugned order which deserves to be set aside and the matter remitted back to the Appellate Authority for reconsideration of the matter afresh on merits, in accordance with law.

4.

A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal summarily as barred by limitation without recording any findings on merits. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, instead of the adjudication order being uploaded on the GST portal adjudication order of one more person i.e., M/s. Sarch Instruments having been uploaded, the petitioner came to know about the impugned adjudication order only on 02.05.2025 and the appeal filed on HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49685

01.08.

2024 was clearly within the prescribed period of limitation and consequently, the impugned order deserves to be set aside and the matter remitted back to the Appellate Authority for reconsideration afresh on merits and in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is hereby allowed.

(ii) The impugned order at Annexure – H dated 06.09.2024 passed by 2nd respondent – Appellate Authority is hereby set aside.

(iii) Matter is remitted back to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration of the appeal on merits without reference to the period of limitation by holding that the appeal is within time and for disposal on merits and in accordance with law.

(iv) The amount deposited by the petitioner before this Court as well as before the Appellate Authority shall be subject to the final outcome of the appeal.

(v) The Appellate Authority shall dispose of the appeal within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49685 (vi) The petitioner is directed to appear before the 2nd respondent on 19.12.2025 without awaiting notice from the respondent. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 44

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.