M/S Pooja Steel And Cement vs. Office Of The Assistant Commissioner
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 a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction to set aside quash the Impugned Show cause Notice No. ACCT(P)/LGSTO-025/DRC-01/No.1/2AvsR3B/2023-24 dated 1.03.2024 passed by the respondent which is enclosed at Annexure A to this Writ Petition;
(b) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction to set aside / quash the impugned Order in impugned Order in Order No.ACCT(P)/LGSTO-025/DRC-01/No.1/ 2AvsR3B/2024-25 dated 18.05.2024, passed by the respondent which is enclosed at Annexure B to this Writ Petition;
(c) Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case."
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record.
A perusal of the material on record will indicate that pursuant to the pre-intimation notice in Form DRC-01A dated HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39940
2024, the respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 01.03.2024 under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 alleging that there was a difference in availment of ITC between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A. Since the petitioner did not submit his reply to the said show-cause notice also, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 18.05.2024 at Annexure-A under Section 73(9)of the KGST Act, 2017 read with section 61of the CGST Act, 2017 and section 50 of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017 confirming the total demand of Rs. 6,96,657/- including the tax, interest and penalty.
Learned counsel for the petitioner while filing submits that the sole proprietor of the Petitioner was unaware of the pre- intimation note and also the show-cause notice, which were only uploaded in the portal and resultantly, couldn’t contest the proceedings. It is submitted that since the GST Appellate Tribunal has not been constituted as on today, the petitioner has no option but to approach 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 pre-intimation notice and show- cause notice and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39940 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 as regards to the petitioner not having replied to the notices by filing replies/documents or appearing personally before the respondent and his inability and omission to contest the proceedings, is a matter of record and an undisputed fact that the petitioner did not submit his reply to the show-cause notice or pre- intimation notice nor contested the proceedings, which 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 bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39940 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 orders dated 18.05.2024 remitting the matter 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 01.03.2024. 8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER
(i) The petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 18.05.2024 passed by the respondent under Section 73 r/w. Section 6 of the CGST Act, 2017, at Annexure-B is hereby set aside.
(iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.15,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru.
(iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent on 11.11.2025 at 11.00 a.m. without awaiting further notice from the first respondent; HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39940 failing which the present order shall stand recalled automatically.
(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. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
BMC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 38
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.