M/S B S Channabasappa And Sons vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: (i) The Order of the First respondent dated 30.12.2023 passed under Section 73(9) & (10) of KGST / CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 142 of the KGST / CGST Rules, 2017 (Annexure-A). (ii) The order of the First respondent passed under Section 161 of the KGST Act dated 29.06.2024 in HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48563 No.DCCT/(A2)/DVG/2024-25 T.No.225/24-25 for the year 2017-18 (Annexure-B). (iii) The order of the second respondent dated 25.02.2025 passed under Section 107(11) of the Act in Appeal No.KGST/AP-332/2024-25 (Annexure-C) for the year 2017-18, insofar it is prejudicial to the petitioner; and (iv) Such other writ or writs in the nature of writs or directions, as the Hon'ble court may deem it fit, to grant in the petitioner's case.
Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
A perusal of the material available on record will indicate that on 26.09.2023, respondent No.1 issued a show cause notice in Form DRC-01 dated 26.09.2023 to which the petitioner submitted replies and contested the proceedings, which culminated in the impugned order at Annexure-A dated 30.12.2023 under Section 79(3) of the KGST Act. Subsequently, the petitioner filed rectification application under Section 161 of the KGST Act, which was also rejected by respondent No.1 vide order dated 29.06.2024. Aggrieved by the impugned orders at Annexures-A and B dated HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48563
2023 and 29.06.2024, the petitioner filed the appeal before the respondent No.2- appellate authority who also proceeded to pass the impugned order at Annexure-C dated 25.02.2025. Aggrieved by the impugned orders passed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2, petitioner is before this court by way of the present petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents proceeded to reject the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the suppliers of the petitioner had not paid GST and had not filed returns and consequently the claim of the petitioner was rejected. by respondent Nos.1 and 2. In this context, it is submitted that during the course of the proceedings before respondent Nos.1 and 2, the petitioner did not have custody / possession of relevant documents, which would indicate that the returns was actually filed by the suppliers who had also paid GST to respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the said documents are now made available before this court in the present petition. It is therefore submitted that if the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for re-consideration afresh in accordance with law, the petitioner would produce the said HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48563 documents before the respondent No.1 who may be directed to consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law.
Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
A perusal of the impugned orders at Annexures A, B and C passed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 respectively will indicate that they have proceeded on the basis that the petitioner had not produced the documents to indicate that the supplier had filed returns and paid GST to the respondent Nos.1 and 2. Under these circumstances, in the light of specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to produce relevant documents in relation to the suppliers filing GST returns and paying GST to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause coupled with specific contention of the petitioner that if one more opportunity is provided, the petitioner would produce the relevant documents before respondent No.1, I deem it just and appropriate to adopt the justice oriented approach and set aside the impugned orders at HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48563 Annexures-A, B and C and remit the matter back to the respondent No.1 for re-consideration afresh, in accordance with law.
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 30.12.2023 passed by the first respondent under 73(9) & 10 of the KGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 142 of the KGST/CGST Rules, 2017 at Annexures – A is hereby set aside. (iii) The impugned order dated 25.02.2025 passed by the second respondent under Section 107(11) of the Act at Annexure-C is hereby set aside. (iv) 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 26.09.2023 under section 73(1) of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 at Annexure – B. (v) The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent No.1 on 15.12.2025 without awaiting further notice from the respondent No.1. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48563 (vi) The liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file additional pleadings, replies, documents etc., which shall be considered by the respondent No.1 who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear them and proceed further in accordance with law. (vii) In the event, the Petitioner does not appear before the respondent No.1 on 15.12.2025 as stated supra, present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 47 CT: BHK
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.