M/S Sri. Laxmi vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of

Original PDF →
WP/107777/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC02021017202527 October 2025Bench: M.NAGAPRASANNA4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. H. R. KAMBIYAVAR, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR RESPONDENT/STATE; SRI. M.B.KANAVI, CGSC FOR R5

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14319 WP No. 107777 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 107777 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S SRI. LAXMI NARASIMHA PROJECTS, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, PLOT NO. 88, NISARGA LAYOUT, FIRST FLOOR, NEAR RING ROAD, HATALGERI ROAD, GADAG 582101 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. H. R. KAMBIYAVAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (AUDIT)-1, NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI – 580 025. 2. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (APPEALS) DHARWAD DIVISION, DHARWAD C.R. BUILDING, NAVANAGAR, P.B.ROAD, HUBBALLI – 580 025. 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, DR. BR AMBEDAKAR, VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. 4. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE) RAJPATH MARG, ' E' BLOCK, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI, DELHI – 110 011. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR RESPONDENT/STATE; SRI. M.B.KANAVI, CGSC FOR R5) VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.10.28 15:45:54 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14319 WP No. 107777 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR IN THE LIKE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO.APPEAL NO.APL/GST-243/2025-26, DATED 16/09/2025, PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO. 2 VIDE ANNEXURE F, TO THE PETITION. ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR IN THE LIKE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. DCCT/ADT-1/HBL/SEC-73/24-25/115 DATED 26/07/2024, PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 VIDE ANNEXURE – B. ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR LIKE IN THE NATURE OF DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO. 1 AND 2 TO PASS THE ORDER ON MERITS OF THE CASE AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1.

Petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

A. Issue Writ of Certiorari or in the like nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order bearing no. Appeal no.APL/GST-243/2025-26, dated 16/09/2025, passed by respondent no. 2 vide Annexure F, to the petition.

B. Issue Writ of Certiorari or in the like nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order bearing no. DCCT/ADT-1/HBL/SEC-73/24-25/115 dated 26/07/2024, passed by respondent no. 1 vide Annexure – B.

C. Issue writ of mandamus or like in the nature of directing the respondent no. 1 and 2 to pass the order on merits of the case.

D. Pass such other order or further Orders as this Hon’ble court may deems fit in the facts and circumstances of this case, in the interest of justice and equity. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14319

2.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner notwithstanding the fact of payment of complete tax, the assessment is drawn against him, against which an appeal is preferred and the appeal is rejected on the sole ground of delay.

3.

The learned counsel submits that the issue in the lis stands answered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Writ Petition No.107549/2024 disposed of on 21.01.2025. 4. In the light of the issue standing answered by this Court and that of the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No.100608/2025, the petition deserves to succeed in the same direction that is issued while disposing of Writ Petition No.107549 of 2024. 5. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER i. Writ petition is allowed in part. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14319 ii. The petitioner is permitted to file an appeal against the cancellation of registration before the Appellate Authority within four weeks from the date of the receipt of this order. iii. In the event, the appeal is preferred within four weeks as aforesaid, it shall be considered on its merit and not reject the appeal on the ground of limitation. iv. In the event, the petitioner would not prefer an appeal within four weeks as permitted above, the benefit of the order rendered in the subject petition would not be available to the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

KGK/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 64

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.