M/S Bright Power Projects (I) PVT LTD. vs. The State Of Karnataka
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 a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction , setting aside the impugned Order-in-Original dated: 16.07.2024 at Annexure- A passed by Respondent No.2 the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Audit 2.4, DGSTO-2, Bengaluru, for the Financial Year 2019-20, as being illegal, arbitrary without juri iction and violative of the principles of natural justice.
(B) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the Respondent No.2 to conduct a fresh assessment/reassessment for the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47213 Financial Year 2019-20 in accordance with law, after providing a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner, and by taking into consideration all the submission and documents filed by the Petitioner.
(C) Grant such other consequential reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, including the costs of this petition.”
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.
A perusal of material on record will indicate that pursuant to notice in Form GST DRC-01A dated 08.05.2024 the 2nd respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 18.05.2024 under Section 74(1) of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 alleging that there were certain discrepancies. Since the petitioner did not submit its reply to the said show-cause notice also, the 2nd respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 16.07,2024 under Section 74 of the KGST Act, 2017 confirming the total demand of Rs.2,00,79,403/- including the tax, interest and penalty. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47213
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner couldn't submit replies/ documents to neither the pre- intimation notice nor the show-cause notice under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 and resultantly, couldn’t contest the proceedings. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner having no option has approached this Court by way of the present petition interalia 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 AGA 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, the counsel for the petitioner submits that due to bonafide HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47213 reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and the fact that the petitioner did not file its reply/ documents culminated in the impugned ex-parte order.
Under these circumstances, having regard to the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that its 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 orders dated 16.07.2024 and remitting the matter back to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration of the matter afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting reply to the impugned show-cause notice dated 18.05.2024. 8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 16.07.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent under 73 of the KGST Act, 2017 at Annexure – A is hereby set aside. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47213 (iii) The matter is remitted back to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting its reply to the notice dated 18.05.2024 issued under Section 74 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017. (iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the 2nd respondent on 11.12.2025 without awaiting further notice from the 2nd respondent. (v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit replies, documents etc., which shall be considered by the 2nd respondent, who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear them and proceed further in accordance with law. (vi) In the event, the petitioner does not appear before the 2nd respondent on 11.12.2025 as stated supra, the present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 88
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.