M/S Freshgreen Agro Exports PVT LTD vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Learned AGA is directed to take notice for the respondents.

Petitioner is a Private Limited Company carrying activities of agricultural products exporting Gherkins for various countries. It is also registered under the KGST Act and CGST Act.

Petitioner filed his returns for the assessment year 2020-2021 before the concerned authority. Thereafter, respondent No.2 got issued notice and initiated the assessment proceedings. In response to the audit report, the petitioner filed a representation. Thereafter, respondent No.2 got issued show cause notice dated 20.06.2024 under HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9095 Section 73(5) of the KGST and CGST Act, 2017, for the period 2020-2021. By considering the reply given by the petitioner, authorities dropped the proceedings after being satisfied with contents of the reply. However, the respondent authorities proceeded to continue with the proceedings with respect to the other issues in the show cause notice.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that due to paucity of time, the petitioner could not file its reply to the show cause notice so also due to illness of its Auditor. Hence, respondent No.2 authority proceeded to pass an adjudication order under Section 73(9) read with Section 50 of the GST Act vide order dated 18.12.2024. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the order passed by the 2nd respondent is not maintainable, the same requires to be set aside. He has relied upon a judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9095 issuance of show cause notice has not provided opportunity to the petitioner and has proceeded to pass the order, which is bad in law and same requires to be set aside so also it is contended that the respondent has failed to appreciate the claim of interest amount on the belated returns as per the notification No.31/2020 Central Tax dated 03.04.2020 despite the same, disallowed the claim of the petitioner which is without juri iction. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also raised several other grounds seeking for setting aside the impugned order.

Per Contra, the learned AGA contends that the petition is not maintainable for the reason that there is an alternative efficacious remedy available under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017 on any order passed under Section 73(9) of the GST Act. On this ground, the learned AGA contends that the petitioner requires to be relegated to approach the appellate authority and seek appropriate remedy before the said authority. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9095

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for the respondents.

Without adverting to the merits of the matter and so also the contentions raised by the petitioner, prima-facie it is seen that there is an appeal remedy contemplated on any order passed under Section 73(9) of the GST Act. Therefore, the petitioner herein would have to be invariably relegated to the appellate authority.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit 10% of the tax amount.

Placing his submission on record, I pass the following: ORDER (i) Petition is disposed of. (ii) Two weeks time is granted to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9095 (iii) Petitioner shall deposit 10% of the tax amount. The impugned order shall not be precipitated by the respondent on deposit of 10% of the tax amount. (iv) Respondent shall deal with the matter in accordance with law by providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass suitable orders in accordance with law. (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE