BharatTaxGST

M/S Basanagouda Ayyanagouda Civil Contractor vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/203910/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC03009715202405 March 2025Bench: ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE3 pages
For Petitioner: SRI DEVI PRASAD GANPATRAO AND SRI AMBADAS KULKARNI, ADVOCATESFor Respondent: SRI MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, A.G.A

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1452 WP No. 203910 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 203910 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. BASANAGOUDA AYYANAGOUDA CIVIL CONTRACTOR (A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN, REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISION OF GST ACT, 2017), HARANGERA POST, UKKINAL TALUK, SHAHAPUR, YADGIR 585 201. REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI BASANNAGOWDA S/O AYYANAGOUDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI DEVI PRASAD GANPATRAO AND SRI AMBADAS KULKARNI, ADVOCATES) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDTI-5) 2ND FLOOR, ROOM NO.16, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KALABURGI – 585 102. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, A.G.A.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A Digitally signed by SHIVAKUMAR HIREMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1452 WP No. 203910 of 2024 WRIT OF CERTIORARI, OR SUCH OTHER WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED

ORDER NO.ACCT/A-5/KLB/FILE- 143/ORDER/2024-25 DATED 19.07.2024 PASSED BY RESPONDENT IN ANNEXURE-E AND ETC.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)

This petition is filed assailing the order dated 19.07.2024 passed by the respondent which is marked at Annexure-E. Pursuant to the show cause notice issued under GST Act, the petitioner has replied, however, the impugned order is passed without considering the reply and without hearing the petitioner.

2.

Under the circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is invoking writ juri iction despite the remedy of appeal provided under the Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the fact that, the reply to show cause notice is not considered and the petitioner was not heard. NC: 2025:KHC-K:1452 WP No. 203910 of 2024

4.

Since the petitioner is not heard and his reply is not considered as can be seen from the impugned order, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the respondent to hear the case afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

5.

The impugned order dated 19.07.2024 at Annexure-E is set aside.

6.

It is stated that, a scheme is launched conferring some benefits to assessee. If there is any scheme conferring benefit on the petitioner under the GST Act, the same shall be considered in accordance with law.

7.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

8.

It is made clear that, nothing is expressed on the merits of the matter and all contentions are kept open. (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

SVH List No.: 2 Sl No.: 27

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.