M/S Mgr Stone Crisher vs. The Assistant Commissioner
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
Sri.H.R.Kambiyavar, learned counsel the petitioner and Sri.S.V.Magadum, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5 and Sri.Venkatesh M Kharvi, leaned counsel for respondent No.4, have appeared in person.
The present petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the Notifications and the circular instructions that have led to levy of GST on the amount of royalty specifically included circular bearing No.164/20.2021-GST dated 06.10.2021 vide Annexure –D and to quash the impugned Order dated 15.11.2024 passed by respondent No.3 for the Financial year 2022- 2023. 3. Heard Sri.H.R.Kambiyavar, learned counsel the petitioner and Sri.S.V.Magadum, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8097 and Sri. Venkatesh M Kharvi, leaned counsel for respondent No.4. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petition be allowed referring the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court.
Per contra, learned AGA relies on the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP.No.100875/2024 and the judgment of this Court in WP.No.103311/2025 without adverting to the merits of the matter. It is contended by the learned counsel for the respondents that there is an appeal provision specifically provided under Section 107 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and therefore, the petitioner would have to be relegated to the appellate remedy and all the contentions raised herein could be adverted to by the petitioner before the appellate authority. The judgment of the apex Court is not disputed, as certain guidelines wherein para 25(a), (b) and (c ) is held as under: HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8097
Bearing in mind the consequences that would emanate from the past period the following conditionalities are directed to prevail:
a. While the States may levy or renew demands of tax, if any, pertaining to Entries 49 and 50 of list II of such Seventh Schedule in terms of the law laid down in the decision in MADA (supra) the demand of tax shall not operate on transactions made prior to 1 April 2005;
b. The time for payment of the demand of tax shall be staggered in instalments over a period of twelve years commencing from 1 April 2026; and C. The Levy of interest and penalty on demands made for the period before 25 July 2024 shall stand waived for all the assesses."
In view of the provisions of Section 107 of the GST Act, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition on the ground that there is alternative efficacious remedy available to the petitioner. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. Writ petitions are disposed of. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8097 ii. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate appellate authority, if so advised. iii. All contentions raised herein are permitted to be urged before appellate authority. iv. On such, petition filed by the petitioner, the appellate authority shall consider the same in accordance with law. v. The time spent herein shall be condoned by the appellate authority. Ordered accordingly. (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE
AC CT-CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 98
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.