M/S Sri Krishna Commercial Corporation vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central Tax
Held
The Court held that the writ petition had become infructuous. This was based on the petitioner's submission, supported by a memo, that the Additional Commissioner had already adjudicated the Show Cause Notice by passing an Order-In-Original. The petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition on this ground. The Court accepted this submission and proceeded to dismiss the writ petition as withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that once an adjudication order is passed pursuant to a show cause notice, a writ petition challenging only the show cause notice becomes infructuous, and the appropriate course of action is withdrawal or pursuing remedies against the adjudication order.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Sri Krishna Commercial Corporation, filed a writ petition challenging a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated August 31, 2023, issued by the Joint Commissioner of Central Tax, Belagavi Audit Commissionerate. The SCN was related to GST matters. The High Court had listed the matter for further hearing on January 23, 2025, and directed the respondents to file their Statement of Objections. However, the petitioner subsequently filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the petition. The memo stated that the Additional Commissioner, Belagavi (Executive) Commissionerate, had adjudicated the impugned SCN and passed an Order-In-Original dated December 12, 2024, which was received by the petitioner on December 13, 2024. Consequently, the petitioner submitted that the writ petition had become infructuous.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition challenging the Show Cause Notice has become infructuous due to the subsequent passing of an Order-In-Original by the respondent authority, thereby rendering the challenge to the SCN moot. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that since the respondent No. 2 has already adjudicated the impugned Show Cause Notice and passed an Order-In-Original, the present writ petition has become infructuous and should be permitted to be withdrawn in the interest of justice. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the revenue or state regarding the issues raised.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
- 1 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:18492 WP No. 102301 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT PETITION NO.102301 OF 2024 (T-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/S. SRI KRISHNA COMMERCIAL CORPORATION, M/S. SANJAY KUMAR VARMA, 6-1-1880/C, GANGAVATI ROAD, SINDHANOOR, RAICHUR, KARNATAKA – 584 128, REPRESENTED BY SHRI VENKAT RAO BALLAMUDI, PARTNER UNDER THE PARTNERSHIP ACT 1932. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHIVARAJ C. BELLAKKI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, BELAGAVI AUDIT COMMISSIONERATE, NO.71, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI – 590 001. 2. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, BELAGVI (EXECUTIVE) COMMISSIONERATE, O/O. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, BELAGVI AUDIT COMMISSIONERATE, 2ND FLOOR, GST BHAWAN, 71 CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI – 590 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SHIVARAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTICE NO. SCN NO.08/2023/BLY (GST AUDIT) DATED 31-08-2023 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY RESPONDE
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.