Sri. Nikhil Kumar Ramesh Jain vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Taxes
Original PDF →WP/10021/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01020216202424 September 2025Bench: M.NAGAPRASANNA3 pages
For Petitioner: SRI M.THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI JEEVAN J.NEERALGI, ADVOCATE
No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2025:KHC:38597
WP No. 10021 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 10021 OF 2024 (T-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI NIKHIL KUMAR RAMESH JAIN
PROPRIETOR OF
M/S.MAHAVEER MARKETING
A PROPRIETARY CONCERN
NO.22, B CROSS
NEAR BIG BAZAAR
BADRAPPA LAYOUT
BENGALURU – 560 094
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
S/O SRI RAMESH KUMAR.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI M.THIRUMALESH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAXES
NORTH DIVISON-6
NORTH COMMISSIONERATE
3RD FLOOR, NO.16/1
S.P.COMPLEX, LALBAGH ROAD
BENGALURU – 560 027.
2.
THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX
NORTH COMMISSIONERATE OF NORTH DIVISION-6
C.R.BUILDING, QUEEN’S ROAD
BENGALURU – 560 001.
Digitally signed by
NAGAVENI
Location: High
Court of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2025:KHC:38597
WP No. 10021 of 2024
3.
THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF
GOODS AND SERVICE TAX
(ITGRC) BENGALURU NORTH
NO.59, HMT BHAVAN
BELLARY ROAD
BENGALURU – 560 032.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI JEEVAN J.NEERALGI, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) QUASH
THE NOTICE IN FORM GST DRC-01 DATED 27/09/2023 ISSUED
BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAXES, NORTH
DIVISION-6, BENGALURU, THE FIRST RESPONDENT HEREIN,
IN
C.
NO.
IV/09/16/2023-24
CND6
DIN
2023095700000041944E UNDER SECTIONS 73(1) OF THE
KGST ACT, 2017 AND CGST ACT, 2017 IN THE CASE OF THE
PETITIONER - ANNEXURE-K; ii) QUASH THE ORDER DATED
26/12/2023 PASSED BY THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF
CENTRAL TAXES, NORTH DIVISION -6, BENGALURU, THE FIRST
RESPONDENT HEREIN, IN FILE NO. IV/09/16/2023-24 CND6
DIN 20231257000000555C6A UNDER SECTIONS 73(9) AND 50
OF THE KGST ACT, 2017 AND CGST ACT, 2017 IN THE CASE
OF THE PETITIONER ANNEXURE-N; iii) A DECLARATION
DECLARING THAT THE DENIAL OF INPUT TAX CREDIT TO THE
PETITIONER
IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL,
UNLAWFUL
AND
ARBITRARY,
MORE
SO
WHERE
THE
OVERRIDING
AND
SUBSTANTIVE PROVISIONS IN SECTIONS 16(1) AND (2) OF
THE GST ACTS, HAVE ADMITTEDLY BEEN FULFILLED BY THE
PETITIONER.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2025:KHC:38597
WP No. 10021 of 2024
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
Learned counsel for petitioner has filed a memo seeking leave of the Court to withdraw the petition.
Memo is taken on record.
In view of the memo filed, petition is disposed as withdrawn. (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE
bkp List No.: 5 Sl No.: 2
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.