Sri Siddalingeshwara Graphics vs. The Commercial Tax Officer (Enf-23)
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sri Siddingeshwara Graphics, filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order dated 26.12.2024, passed by the Commercial Tax Officer (Enf-23), South Zone-23. The petitioner had filed GSTR3B returns for April 2019 to March 2020. The respondent issued a Form ASMT-10 notice regarding discrepancies between GSTR3B and GSTR2A. Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued, to which the petitioner failed to submit a reply. Consequently, the respondent passed an ex-parte adjudication order. The petitioner contended that their failure to reply was due to bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances, and sought to quash the order and remit the matter for fresh consideration, also citing a relevant government circular.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition. It held that it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner did not respond to the show cause notice, leading to an ex-parte order without hearing the petitioner. Acknowledging the petitioner's assertion of bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause for their omission, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach. To provide one more opportunity, the Court set aside the impugned adjudication order dated 26.12.2024. The matter was remitted back to the respondent for fresh reconsideration in accordance with the law, specifically bearing in mind Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022. The petitioner was directed to appear before the respondent on 28.04.2025 to submit their reply and relevant documents, after which the respondent was to afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard and proceed further. The Court clarified that if the petitioner failed to appear or submit documents on the specified date, the order would stand automatically recalled. All rival contentions were kept open.
Key Issues
1. Whether the ex-parte adjudication order passed by the respondent is liable to be quashed on the grounds of the petitioner's failure to submit a reply to the show cause notice due to bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause, as per the principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the adjudication order is vitiated by non-consideration of Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that their inability to respond to the show cause notice was due to bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances. They contended that the ex-parte order should be quashed and the matter remitted for fresh consideration, providing an opportunity to submit a reply. The petitioner also argued that the impugned order was vitiated by the non-consideration of Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent, through the learned Additional Government Advocate, supported the impugned order and argued that the petition lacked merit and should be dismissed, particularly as the petitioner did not exercise due diligence in participating in the proceedings.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner is seeking for the following reliefs: “(a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ/ to quash the impugned Adjudication bearing No.ADCOM(Enf)/SZ/CTO(Enf)-23/ADJ- 02/2022-23 dated 26.12.2024 (Annexure-A) passed by the Respondent. (b) Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.”
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondent and perused the material on record.
A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner filed Form GSTR3B for the month of April 2019 to March 2020. 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 same, the respondent issued show cause notice to the petitioner, who did not submit any rely to the same and consequently, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order at Annexure A dated 26.12.2024, which is assailed in the present petition. NC: 2025:KHC:12111
Learned counsel for the petitioner 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 to 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.
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.
A perusal of the material on record including the impugned orders will indicate that it is an undisputed fact that the NC: 2025:KHC:12111 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.
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i) The Writ Petition is allowed; ii) The impugned order passed by respondent at Annexure A dated 26.12.2024, is hereby set aside; NC: 2025:KHC:12111 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) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent on 28.04.2025 on which date, he shall submit his reply to the show cause notice along with relevant documents. v) Upon the petitioner submitting a reply along with relevant documents to the show cause notice, on 28.04.2025, the respondent shall afford a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear him and proceed further in accordance with law. vi) It is made clear that if he does not appear on 28.04.2025 and does not file objections along with the document on that day, the present order shall stand automatically recalled/cancelled and the present petition shall stand revived/ restored without further orders and without reference to the Bench. NC: 2025:KHC:12111 vii) 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. viii) All rival contentions are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE MDS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 71
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.