M/S Sri Boomibalakan Metal And Alloys vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/5875/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01011424202526 March 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR7 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. SHREEHARI, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. HEMAKUMAR K., AGA FOR R-1 & R-2 SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADV. FOR R-3

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12956 WP No. 5875 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 5875 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S SRI BOOMIBALAKAN METAL AND ALLOYS, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI R MUTHUKUMAR, C/O RAMU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, SITE NO. 6, SURVEY NO.56/2, MACHOHALLI VILLAGE, VISHWANEEDAM POST – 560 091. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHREEHARI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (AUDIT)-6.5, DGSTO-06, KIADB BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR, 14TH CROSS, 4TH PHASE, PEENYA II STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 058. 2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (KARNATAKA), BENGALURU, VANIJYA TERIGE KARYALAYA 2, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE, 80 FT ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU – 560 095. 3. THE MANAGER CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, DOOR NO.252, SUREKA COMPLEX, 100 FT ROAD, NEAR JALAHALLI CROSS, PEENYA, BENGALURU – 560 058. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HEMAKUMAR K., AGA FOR R-1 & R-2 SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADV. FOR R-3) Digitally signed by NANDINI D Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12956 WP No. 5875 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 73(9) DATED 30.07.2024 BEARING FILE NO. DCCT(A)-6.5/DGSTO-6/73/2024-25 ALONG WITH SUMMARY OF

ORDER IN FORM GST DRC-07 BEARING REFERENCE NO.ZD290724101004T FOR THE PERIOD 2019-20 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-H1 AND H2 RESPECTIVELY AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs: A. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ quashing the order under section 73(9) dated 30.07.2024 bearing file NO. DCCT(A)-6.5/DGSTO- 6/73/2024-25 along with summary of order in Form GST DRC-07 bearing reference no.ZD290724101004T for the period 2019-20 issued by Respondent No.1 and enclosed as Annexure H1 & H2 respectively. B. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ quashing the Show Cause Notice under section 73(9) dated 30/05/2024 along with summary of Show Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01 bearing reference no.ZD290524115740H issued by Respondent No.1 and enclosed as Annexure B1 and B2 respectively. NC: 2025:KHC:12956 C. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ quashing the recovery notice under section 79(1) in Form GST DRC-13 bearing no.DCCT(A)-6.5/DGSTO- 6/DRC 13/73/T.No.88/2024-25 dated 16/12/2024 issued by Respondent No.1 and enclosed as Annexure J. D. And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3.

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner filed Form GSTR3B for the period 2019-20. The respondent issued Form ASMT-10 notice, calling for explanation as to the difference/discrepancy between Form GSTR3B and Form GSTR2A submitted by the petitioner. Pursuant to the alleged Audit Report dated 23.05.2024 alleged/said to have been issued by Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit)-6.5, DGSTO-6, KIADB Building, Bengaluru, the Officer issued impugned Show Cause Notices dated 30.05.2024 at Annexures – B1 and B2 to the petitioner, who did not submit any reply to the same, resulting in respondent No.1 proceeding to pass the impugned Adjudication NC: 2025:KHC:12956 Order under Section 73 of CGST/SGST Act dated 30.07.2024, pursuant to which respondent Nos.1 and 3 took steps to freeze the Bank account of the petitioner, due to which, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner did not receive either the audit report or Show Cause Notice and as such, the impugned proceedings are violative of principles of natural justice. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that due to bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the petitioner could not submit his reply to the show cause notice and the impugned ex-parte orders deserve to be quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration of the matter afresh in accordance with law by providing an opportunity to the petitioner to submit a reply to the show cause notice and thereafter pass appropriate orders. It is also submitted that the impugned orders are vitiated on account of non-consideration of the Circular issued by the Central Government, Government of India, bearing No.183/15/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022. It is therefore submitted that the impugned orders deserve to be quashed. NC: 2025:KHC:12956

5.

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent would support the impugned orders and submit that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed, especially when the petitioner did not exercise his due diligence in participating in the impugned proceedings.

6.

A perusal of the material on record including the impugned orders will indicate that it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner did not respond/reply to the show cause notice and the impugned ex-parte orders have been passed without hearing the petitioner. Under these circumstances, in view of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to submit the reply to the show cause notice and participate in the proceedings was due to bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, by adopting a justice oriented approach and in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned orders and remit the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law by issuing certain directions. NC: 2025:KHC:12956

7.

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i) The Writ Petition is allowed; ii) The impugned orders passed by respondent No.1 at Annexures – H1 and H2 dated 30.07.2024 are hereby set aside; iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law, bearing in mind the aforesaid Circular bearing No.183/15/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022; iv) Respondent No.3-Bank is directed to defreeze the account of the petitioner forthwith without any delay. v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file its reply, pleadings, documents, etc., before the respondent, who shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. NC: 2025:KHC:12956 vi) All rival contentions are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

MDS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 19

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.