M/S Bhagyalakshmi Ispat INDIA Private LTD. vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes (Appeals)-5

Original PDF →
WP/20129/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01041469202521 August 2025Bench: M.NAGAPRASANNA5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. Y.C. SHIVAKUMAR., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. K.HEMA KUMAR, LEARNED AGA

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32566 WP No. 20129 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 20129 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S BHAGYALAKSHMI ISPAT INDIA PRIVATE LTD., NO.218, K.R.PURAM, MEDAHALLI, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU-560 049. (A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY REGD. UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI DARSHAN KUMAR,) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. Y.C. SHIVAKUMAR.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS)-5 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ROOM NO.642, 6TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 095 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, LGSTO-37, 58, 1ST FLOOR, HAL 2ND STAGE, DEFENCE COLONY, 100-FEET ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 038 Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32566 WP No. 20129 of 2025 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)-5.3, DGSTO-5, VTK-2, ROOM NO.506, 5TH FLOOR, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 047. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.HEMA KUMAR, LEARNED AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT, DATED 25-11-2024 BEARING NO. NIL, ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, LGSTO-37, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT-2 HEREIN, AS AT ANNEXURE-B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question certain proceedings instituted by the respondents on the score that they have all been rendered ex parte.

2.

Heard Sri Y C Shivakumar, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri K Hema Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32566

3.

The petitioner is a Company registered under the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 2013. It is the averment in the petition that for the year 2017-18, the 2nd respondent passes an order adjudicating demand of certain tax and penalty totaling Rs.8,32,416/-. A show cause notice is said to have been sent on a common portal and the petitioner was not aware of the same. After about 3 months, the 2nd respondent is said to have recovered the demanded sum of Rs.8,32,416/-. The 3rd respondent is then said to have initiated audit proceedings and passed an ex parte order demanding tax, interest and penalty inter alia, on the very issue that the 2nd respondent had passed an order. It is the case of the petitioner that this as well was uploaded on the common portal and the petitioner was not aware.

4.

Since the order of penalty was still subsisting, the petitioner is said to have sought for rectification of the ex parte order, which comes to be rejected. Against the said rejection, the petitioner prefers an appeal to the First Appellate Authority.

The appeal is rejected on the ground of delay, on the score that the petitioner had to prefer an appeal under Section 107 of the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32566 GST Act, within 3 months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and with the leeway of 1 month, after the expiry of 3 months. The petitioner prefers an appeal with delay of 79 days. Therefore, is before the Court challenging the endorsement issued on 25-11-2024 and the consequential action of rejection of the appeal.

5.

In terms of the averment in the petition what would unmistakably emerge is, that the proceedings instituted against the petitioner were undoubtedly ex parte. In the ex parte proceedings, determination of the amount has happened, which would undoubtedly lead to civil consequences.

6.

The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents though would submit that the notice was uploaded on the portal, it was a common portal and therefore, the reason of the petitioner appears to be plausible. In the light of the proceedings being ex parte, and the appeal was preferred on a delay, the Appellate Authority shall now consider the already filed appeal, under Section 107 of the GST Act on its merit, without insistence on limitation, in the teeth of HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32566 the fact that the proceedings are admittedly ex parte. On this short ground, the petition deserves to succeed, with an opportunity to the petitioner to be heard on merits.

7.

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

ORDER

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed-in-part.

(ii) The endorsement dated 25-11-2024 and the acknowledgement for submission of appeal dated 03-03-2025 stands obliterated.

(iii) The matter is remitted back to 1st respondent - Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), to consider the issue afresh and pass necessary orders in accordance with law, on the merit of the matter, within an outer limit of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18

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.