K M Jayaramu Works Contractor vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Audit) 6.3
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 Writ of Certiorari thereby quashing and setting aside the Show Cause Notice dated 29.04.2024 under HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44265 Section 73(1) of the CGST/KGST Acts, 2017, followed by a corresponding Summary Show Cause Notice in bearing Reference No. Form GST DRC-01 ZD2905240619226 dated 20.05.2024 which is at ANNEXURE-C; (b) Issue Writ of Certiorari thereby quashing and setting aside the Order-in-Original passed under Section 73(9) of the CGST/KGST Acts bearing Ref No: File No.134/DGSTO-06/ACCT(A)-6.3/ADJ/S.73/2024-25. And consequential Demand Summary in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Ref No: ZD2908241116465 dated 30.08.2024, which is at ANNEXURE-D;
(c) Issue any appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the initiation and culmination of proceedings by the Respondents i.e., of the State GST Department against the Petitioner, whose registration stands under the administrative control of the Central GST Authorities, are without juri iction and ultra vires Section 6(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, as the same are not based on any intelligence gathered or enforcement action, but are founded solely upon data comparison and return scrutiny, which fall within the administrative competence of the juri ictional Central authorities; and consequently, all proceedings, actions and orders passed pursuant thereto are void ab initio and unenforceable in law.”
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44265
A perusal of material on record will indicate that pursuant to notice in Form GST DRC-01A dated 25.03.2024 the third respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 29.04.2024 under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 alleging that there is short declaration in the GSTR-3B when compared with consideration received from various TDS authorities. Since the petitioner did not submit his reply to the said show-cause notice also, the first respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 30.08.2024 under Section 73(9) of the KGST Act, 2017 confirming the total demand of Rs.1,51,84,852/- including the tax, interest and penalty.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no copy of the relied upon documents was furnished and no effective opportunity of defence or representation was granted 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 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44265 interalia contending that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit a reply to the 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 HCGP 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 no copy of the relied upon documents was furnished and no effective opportunity of defence or representation was granted 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 his inability and omission to submit replies and contest the proceedings was due to HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44265 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 30.08.2024 remitting the matter back to the first 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 29.04.2024. 8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 30.08.2024 passed by the first respondent under Section 73(9) of the KGST Act, 2017 at Annexure –D is hereby set aside.
(iii) The matter is remitted back to the first respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting its reply to the notice dated 29.04.2024 issued under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 at Annexure –D. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44265 (iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the first respondent on 01.12.2025 without awaiting further notice from the first respondent.
(v) The 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.
(vi) In the event, the petitioner does not appear before the first respondent on 01.12.2025 as stated supra, present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
CM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 10
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.