Mantagouda Biradar vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, the petitioner seeks following reliefs: “ i) Quashing the Impugned Order dated 28.08.2026 bearings. ACCT(A) 5.2/CASE ID: AD290524058650X/AD- 7342 20) 2024-25 (Annexure C), issued by the 1st respondent
ii) Quashing the recovery notice dated 08.04.2025 being No.ACCT(Audit)-5-2/T No. /2025-26 (Annexure-D) issued by the Respondent to the 2 Respondent/State Bank of India.
In the Alternative:
iii) Permitting the Petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned Order dated 28.08.2024 bearing No. ACCT(A) 5.2/CASE AD290524058650X/AD3-73 No.64 (2019-20) 2024-25 (Annexure C) before the appellate authority under Section 107 of the GST Act and direct the Respondents not to precipitate the demand raised vide the said order and keep it in abeyance until the admission of such appeal by the appellate authority.
iv) Passing such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court ma deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.” NC: 2025:KHC:18007
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record.
A perusal of material on record will indicate that the respondent no.1 issued Form GST DRC-01A dated 24.05.2024 to the petitioner. The petitioner did not submit any reply/response to the same. Subsequently, respondent no.1 issued a show-cause notice dated 28.05.2024. Since the petitioner did not submit his reply to the said show-cause notice also, the respondent no.1 proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 28.08.2024 under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 confirming the total demand of Rs.5,11,74,169/- including the tax, interest and penalty which is assailed in the present petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither Form GST DRC-01A nor the show-cause notice were uploaded in the portal or served upon the petitioner and it was not aware of the said proceedings. So also, physical copies of the aforesaid notices were not communicated to the petitioner and consequently, it was not in a position to submit a reply to the same and moreover since the sole proprietor who was taking care of tax matters was pre- occupied with medical emergency and hence, he could not file NC: 2025:KHC:18007 reply or contest the proceedings, which culminated in the impugned ex-parte order. The counsel for the petitioner has filed the present petition interalia contending that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit a reply to the show-cause notice and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and submits that if one more opportunity is provided, by setting aside the impugned order, the petitioner would submit a reply to the show-cause notice and contest the proceedings.
Per contra, learned AGA for the respondents submits that since the show-cause notice were duly communicated electronically to the petitioner by sending an e-mail to the petitioner and hence the petitioner cannot complain that he was not aware of impugned proceedings and as such, there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
Though several contentions have been urged by both sides as regards to the petitioner not having received the Form GST DRC-01A notice and show-cause notice and his inability and omission to contest the proceedings, it is a matter of record and an undisputed fact that the petitioner did not submit his reply to the NC: 2025:KHC:18007 show-cause notice nor contested the proceedings, which culminated in the impugned ex-parte order.
Under these circumstances, having regard to the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that its inability and omission to submit replies and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, I deem it just and appropriate to adopt a justice oriented approach and provide one more opportunity to the petitioner by setting aside the impugned order dated 28.08.2024 and remitting the matter back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration of the matter afresh in accordance with law to the stage of petitioner submitting reply to the impugned show-cause notice.
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order at annexure-C dated 28.08.2024 passed by respondent No.1 is hereby set aside, subject to payment of 10% of the tax amount before the concerned respondent(s). NC: 2025:KHC:18007 (iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. (iv) Petitioner undertakes to appear before respondent No.1 on 26.05.2025 without awaiting for notice from respondent No.1. (v) It is made clear that in the event the petitioner does not appear before respondent No.1 on 26.05.2025, the present order shall stand automatically revoked and present petition shall revive, without any further orders and without any reference to the Bench.
(vi) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file additional pleadings, documents, etc., which shall be considered by respondent No.1, who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and proceed further in accordance with law. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
BMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37
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.