M/S Kendeil Indfarad Electronics Private Limited vs. The 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:-
“ (a) Quashing the order of adjudication No. ACCT/LGSTO-026/2A-Vs-3B/DRC-07/16/2023-24, online generated order under Sec.73 and consequently summary of the order in Form DRC-07 bearing reference No. ZD290324046673, all dated: 18.03.2024 (Annexures-‘B’, ‘C’, & ‘D’), and endorsement T.No. 425/2024-25 dated: 05- 09-2024 (Annexure- ‘G’) passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, LGSTO-26, DGSTO- 4, Bengaluru, the 2nd Respondent herein, for the tax periods of the Financial Year 2018-19 No.ZD291224005165P dated: 27.-11-2024 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Appeals-8, Bengaluru, the 3rd Respondent (Annexure-‘H’); HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45467 (b) Grant such other relief as deemed just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of equity and justice.”
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 ASMT-10 dated 06.10.2023 the 2nd respondent issued an intimation notice under Form GST DRC-01A dated 09.11.2023, to the petitioner, who did not issue any reply/response to the same. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 22.11.2023 under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 alleging that there has been a difference in the input tax credit availed by the petitioner for the tax period 2018-
Since the petitioner did not submit his reply to the said show- cause notice also, the 2nd respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 18.03.2024 under Section 73 of the KGST Act, 2017confirming the total demand of Rs.37,40,590/- including the tax, interest and penalty.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not aware of the proceedings and passing of the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45467 order as it failed to view the order in the portal under “view additional notices and orders” and hence couldn't submit replies / documents to neither the show-cause notice under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 and resultantly couldn’t contest the proceedings. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner came to know about the proceedings and filed an appeal on 11.09.2024, which was dismissed as barred by limitation vide impugned order dated 27.11.2024. It is submitted that since the GST Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted as on today, the petitioner has no option but to approach 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. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45467
Though several contentions have been urged by both sides, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not aware of the proceedings and passing of the order, since the same was uploaded in the portal under “view additional notices and orders” and hence the petitioner did not file its reply / documents, the same culminated in the impugned ex-parte order. So also, the appeal filed by the petitioner before the 3rd respondent has been dismissed as barred by limitation.
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 order dated 18.03.2024 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 22.11.2023. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45467
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER
(i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned orders dated 18.03.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent under 73 of the KGST Act, 2017 at Annexures – B, C and D as well as impugned endorsement at Annexure – G and the order at Annexure – H dated 27.11.2024 passed by the 3rd respondent under Section 107(11) of the SGST/CGST Act, 2017 are hereby set aside.
(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 22.11.2023 issued under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 at Annexure – E.
(iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the 2nd respondent on 05.12.2025 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 first respondent who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear them and proceed further in accordance with law. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45467 (vi) In the event, the petitioner does not appear before the 2nd respondent on 05.12.2025 as stated supra, present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 46
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.