Slv Builders vs. The Commercial Tax Officer - Karnataka High Court, 07 November 2025

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45479 WP No. 17793 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 17793 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: SLV BUILDERS A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR GUNTUR RAMA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 4, NEAR ANJANEYA TEMPLE, KALKERE MAIN ROAD, CHANNASANDRA, HORAMAVU POST, BENGALURU 560 043. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRADYUMNA HEJIB, ADVOCATE) AND: THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER LGSTO -055, DGSTO-5, BDA COMPLEX, KALYANA NAGAR, BENGALURU 560 004. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HEMAKUMAR K, AGA) THIS W.P IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER WRIT QUASHING IMPUGNED ADJUDICATION ORDER BEARING NO. ACCT/LGSTO-55/T.NO. /2024-25 DATED 06.04.2024 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED AND ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45479 WP No. 17793 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-

“ (a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ quashing impugned Adjudication Order bearing No.ACCT/LGSTO-55/T.No. /2024-25 dated: 06.04.2024 [Annexure-A] passed and issued by the Respondent;

(b) Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.”

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

A perusal of material on record will indicate that pursuant to notice in Form GST ASMT-01 dated 17.09.2022 the respondent issued an intimation notice under Form GST DRC-01A dated 05.12.2023 to the petitioner, who did not issue any reply/response to the same. Subsequently, the respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 22.12.2023 under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 alleging that there is a suppression of turnover. Since the petitioner did not submit its reply to the said show-cause notice also, the respondent proceeded to pass the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45479 impugned order dated 06.04.2024 under Section 73(9) of the KGST Act, 2017 confirming the total demand of Rs.81,75,002/- including the tax, interest and penalty.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that any notices including the show cause notice received by the petitioner went unnoticed by it and hence 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. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45479

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 any notices including the show cause notice received by the petitioner went unnoticed by it and hence, the petitioner did not file its reply / documents, which 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 order dated 06.04.2024 and remitting the matter back to the 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 22.12.2023. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45479

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is hereby allowed subject to the petitioner depositing cost of Rs.15,000/- to the Karnataka High Court Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru, within a period of six weeks from today.

(ii) The impugned order dated 06.04.2024 passed by the respondent under 73 of the KGST Act, 2017 at Annexure – A is hereby set aside.

(iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting its reply to the notice dated 22.12.2023 issued under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017. (iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent on 05.12.2025 without awaiting further notice from the respondent.

(v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit replies, documents etc., which shall be considered by the respondent, who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear it and proceed further in accordance with law. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45479 (vi) In the event, the petitioner does not appear before the 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.: 90