M/S Ace Comunications vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of

Original PDF →
WP/105419/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC02012934202505 August 2025Bench: SURAJ GOVINDARAJ4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. SHASHANK S. HEGDE, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM., AGA FOR R1 & R2

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9796 WP No. 105419 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 105419 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S ACE COMUNICATIONS H.NO. 1310, TILAK CHOWK BELAGAVI – 590 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR NIKHIL RAVINDRA PATIL …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHASHANK S. HEGDE,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES AUDIT 3 SUMAOULYA SODHA, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI 590001 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS) BELAGAVI DIVISION 5TH FLOOR SUMAOULYA SOUDHA, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI 590001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM., AGA FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24-01-2025 IN APPEAL NO. GST-813/2024-25/B-1229 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IS ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-E AND BY ISSUING SUITABLE DIRECTION(S) RESPONDENT NO.2 TO RESTORE THE APPEAL ON TO HIS FILE AND DISPOSE OF THE SAME ON MERITS AS IF FILED WITHIN TIME LIMIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE/MATTER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY AND ETC. Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9796 WP No. 105419 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

1.

Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents No.1 and 2. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: i. Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 24.01.2025 in Appeal No. GST- 813/2024-24/B-1229 passed by the R2 is enclosed and marked as Annexure-E and by issuing suitable direction(s) to R2 to restore the Appeal on to his file and dispose of the same on merits as if filed within time limit in the facts and circumstances of case/matter in the interest of justice and fair play.

ii. And pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.

3.

The Appeal, which had been filed by the petitioner, came to be dismissed by respondent No.2 on 24.01.2025 solely on the ground that the Appeal was delayed and there was no power with the Joint HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9796 Commissioner under CGST/KGST Act, 2017 to done the delay.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the decision in M/S. Vijay Mining and Infra Corporation Pvt Ltd -vs- The Commercial Tax Officer (2017) 347 ELT 426 (Karnataka), to contend that so long as there is no exceptional delay, this Court would have the power to condone the delay and remit the matter to the Appellate Authority.

5.

In the present matter, the time period for filing of the Appeal being 60 days with a power to condone the delay for a period of 30 days thereafter, the present Appeal has been filed 70 days after the initial period of limitation, i.e. 40 more days than what could be condoned by the Appellate Authority, I am of the considered opinion that the said 40 days delay is not an exceptional delay and or delay which cannot be condoned. In that view of the matter, considering that the petitioner is an assessee who has paid taxes HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9796 for a long period of time, the non-condonation of delay would cause injustice to the petitioner. As such, I pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. A certiorari is issued, the impugned order dated 24.01.2025 in Appeal No.GST-813/2024-25/B- 1229 at Annexure-E passed by respondent No.2 is set-aside. iii. Consequently, the delay in filing the Appeal is condoned and matter is remitted to Respondent No.2, who is directed to consider the matter on merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

LN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 81

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.