M/S Unicorn Traders vs. State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)
The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following prayer: I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned confiscation order (Annexure-A) dated 20.05.2025 in bearing no. Appeal No. APL/GST-912/2024-25 which has been passed without juri iction by Respondent No.3
II. Issue any other writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondents to release the goods and vehicle unconditionally.
III. Grant costs and interests and IV. Grant such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.
Heard the learned counsel Smt.Gayatri S.R. for the petitioner and the learned HCGP Smt.Kirtilata R.Patil for the respondent-State. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13834
The learned counsel Smt.Gayatri S.R. appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue in the lis stands covered by the judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench in W.P.No.105123/2024 disposed on 23rd September 2025. 4. The learned HCGP, Smt.Kirtilata R.Patil would not dispute the position of law as laid down by the Coordinate Bench, in the aforesaid judgment.
The Coordinate Bench has held as follows:
“1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned Appellate Order Appeal No. APL/GST-121-2218-409 (Annexure-A) dated 15.09.2022 which has been passed by without juri iction by the respondent no.4. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned confiscation order (Annexure-B) dated. 17.09.2021 which has been issued by without juri iction passed by the respondent no.6. iii. Direct the Respondents to refund the amount received by the respondent through auction of the goods.
iv. Issue any other writ or order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13834 may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the present case.
v. Grant costs and interest.
vi. Grant such further and other reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require.
A notice was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to pay the differential tax along with penalty. Consequent to the said notice, the goods in question were seized/confiscated and subsequently brought to auction. The proceeds of the said auction are presently lying with the respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the amount realized from the auction is in excess of 20% of the demand raised against the petitioner. In such circumstances, it is submitted that the petitioner has complied with the requirement under Clause (b) of Sub-section (8) of Section 112 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the KGST Act’). Accordingly, the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of Section 112(9) of the KGST Act, and no further recovery proceedings can be initiated against him pending appeal.
In light of the fact that the GST Appellate Tribunal has not yet become operational, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal within 60 days from the date on which the Tribunal becomes functional, in terms of Notification dated 17.09.2025. 5. The respondents shall not initiate or continue any recovery proceedings against the petitioner during this interim period, subject to the auction proceeds continuing to be held in deposit.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.” HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13834
In the light of the aforesaid submission, which is in unison, the writ petition stands disposed in the aforesaid manner. (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE
KGK/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 116
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.