M/S Cargomar Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Original PDF →Facts
M/s. Cargomar Private Limited (the petitioner) filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an order dated 27.05.2025 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)-9 (the second respondent). The petitioner was aggrieved by an adjudication order dated 31.08.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (the first respondent). The petitioner had filed an appeal before the second respondent. During the pendency of this appeal, the second respondent issued a notice for personal hearing. However, the petitioner failed to appear for the hearing, leading the second respondent to dismiss the appeal for non-appearance/non-prosecution. The petitioner is now before the High Court seeking to quash this dismissal order and have the appeal restored for a decision on merits.
Held
The Court held that the impugned order at Annexure-A, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal due to non-appearance, was not decided on merits. The Court adopted a justice-oriented approach, acknowledging the petitioner's submission of bonafide reasons and unavoidable circumstances for their absence. Consequently, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to provide the petitioner with one more opportunity to prosecute the appeal on merits. The Court set aside the impugned order dated 27.05.2025 passed by the second respondent and remitted the matter back to the second respondent for reconsideration of the appeal on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner was directed to appear before the second respondent on 26.11.2025 without awaiting further notice. The Court clarified that if the petitioner failed to appear on the specified date, the order would stand automatically recalled and the petition revived. The second respondent was directed to provide a sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and dispose of the appeal on merits. All rival contentions and aspects of the matter were kept open, with no opinion expressed on the merits of the case.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 27.05.2025 passed by the second respondent, dismissing the petitioner's appeal for non-appearance, is liable to be set aside? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that their inability to appear before the appellate authority was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause. They contended that if the impugned order were set aside and the matter remitted, they would diligently prosecute the appeal. They sought an opportunity for a personal hearing and to file additional pleadings and documents. Revenue's contention: The learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents argued that there was no merit in the petition and that it was liable to be dismissed.
Sections Cited
Section 107(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
In this Petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: "WHERFORE, the Petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:
Issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of Certiorari or any such /other writ, direction or order to quash or set aside the impugned order vide Reference ZD2905250963332 dated 27.05.2025 passed by the Respondent no. 2 herein and produced as ANNEXURE-A; Issue a Writ of Mandamus or in the nature of Mandamus or any such /other writ, direction or order directing the Respondent No. 2 to restore the appeal and pass order based on merits by granting opportunity of personal hearing to file additional pleadings and documents following the principles of natural justice and in accordance with the law; I. Hold that the activity undertaken by the Petitioner amounts to export of services and qualifies for zero-rating benefit under the provisions of GST laws; iv. Grant ad interim relief as prayed for; and HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43294 V. Grant such further or other reliefs as this Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interests of justice and equity".
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.
A perusal of the material on record will indicate that aggrieved by an adjudication order dated 31.08.2024 passed by the respondent No.1, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 107(1) before the second respondent - appellate authority. During the pendency of the said appeal, the second respondent - appellate authority issued notice to the petitioner calling upon him to appear for personal hearing. Despite which, petitioner did not appear. Consequently, the second respondent dismissed the appeal for non-appearance/non-prosecution. Aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the second respondent at Annexure-A dated 27.05.2025, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43294
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to appear before the second respondent - appellate authority and prosecute the appeal on merits was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause. It is submitted that if the impugned order at Annexure-A is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the second respondent-appellate authority for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law, the petitioner would diligently prosecute the appeal, which may be directed to be disposed of on merits.
Per contra, learned AGA submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
A perusal of the impugned order at Annexure-A will indicate that the appeal has not been dismissed on merits but due to non-appearance of the petitioner. Under these circumstances, by adopting a justice oriented approach and in order to provide one more opportunity to HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43294 the petitioner to prosecute the appeal on merits, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure-A passed by respondent No.2-appellate authority dated 27.05.2025 and remit the matter back to the second respondent for reconsideration on merits and in accordance with law, by issuing certain direction.:
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER
i) Petition is hereby allowed.
ii) The impugned order dated 27.05.2025 at Annexure-A is hereby set aside.
iii) The matter is remitted back to the second respondent for reconsideration of the appeal on merits and in accordance with law.
iii) The petitioner shall appear before the second respondent on 26.11.2025 without awaiting further notice from the second respondent. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43294 iv) It is made clear that in the event, if the petitioner does not appear before the second respondent on 26.11.2025, the present order shall stand automatically recalled and the present petition shall stand revived without reference to the Bench.
v) The second respondent - appellate authority shall reconsider the appeal on merits and provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and dispose of the appeal in accordance with law.
vi) All rival contentions and all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BSV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11
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.