M/S. Haji Sulaiman vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Audit)

Original PDF →
WP/27274/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01058651202513 October 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR6 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. VENKATANARAYANA G.M., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SMT. JYOTI M.MARADI, HCGP

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40512 WP No. 27274 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.27274 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. HAJI SULAIMAN (REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR. HAJI SULAIMAN) SONA PLAZA, OT ROAD, SHIMOGA, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 202. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATANARAYANA G.M., ADVOCATE) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT), OPP RTO OFFICE, K.M. ROAD, JYOTHI NAGAR, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 102. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. JYOTI M.MARADI, HCGP) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE IMPUGNED VIDE FORM GST DRC-07, REFERENCE NO.ZD290125105203X BEARING NO.DCCT (A)/CKM/2024-25/T.NO.2886 DATED 27.01.2025 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT AS BEING VOID, ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL, VIOLATIVE OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE SAME. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40512 WP No. 27274 of 2025

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a writ of certiorari declaring the impugned vide Form GST DRC-07 Reference No.ZD290125105203X bearing No.DCCT (A) CKM/2024-25/T.No.2886 dated 27.01.2025 [Annexure-A] passed by the respondent as being void, arbitrary, illegal, violative of principles of natural justice, and consequently set aside the same.

b) Remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for fresh consideration.

c) Pass any other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice."

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3.

A perusal of material on record will indicate that pursuant to the notice in Form GST DRC - 01A dated 15.11.2024, the respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 21.11.2024 under Section 73(1) of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 alleging that the petitioner had claimed ineligible ITC in contravention of the provisions of the Act. Since the petitioner did not submit its reply to the said show-cause notice also, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 27.01.2025 under Section 73(1) HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40512 read with section 73(9) of the KGST Act, 2017 confirming the total demand of Rs.8,87,275/- including the tax, interest and penalty.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid notices were uploaded in the common GST portal and were not communicated to the petitioner either through e-mail or through registered post and hence, the said notices went unnoticed by the petitioner and consequently, couldn't submit replies / documents to neither the intimation notice nor the show-cause notice under Section 73(1) nor the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 and resultantly, couldn’t contest the proceedings. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that an opportunity of personal hearing was not granted to the petitioner before passing the impugned order and thereby violating the principles of natural justice. 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 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 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40512 order, the petitioner would submit a reply to the show-cause notice and contest the proceedings.

5.

Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondent submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6.

Though several contentions have been urged by both sides, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notices / intimations were uploaded in the common portal and the same were not communicated to the petitioner either through e- mail nor through registered post and the fact that the petitioner did not file its reply / documents culminated in the impugned ex-parte order.

7.

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 27.01.2025 and remitting the matter HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40512 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 21.11.2024. 8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is hereby allowed subject to the petitioner depositing cost of Rs.10,000/- to the Karnataka High Court Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru, within a period of six weeks from today.

(ii) The impugned order dated 27.01.2025 passed

by the respondent under 73(1) read with Section 73(9)

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 21.11.2024 issued under Section 73(1) of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017. (iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent on 24.11.2025 without awaiting further notice from the respondent. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40512 (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 respondent on 24.11.2025 as stated supra, present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 70

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.