Sanjeevappa Channakeshavappa vs. The Commercial Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sanjeevappa Channakeshappa, filed a writ petition challenging two orders dated 27.12.2023 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer (Respondent) for the tax period 2017-18. The petitioner had filed Form GSTR3B for March 2018 on 24.04.2018. Subsequently, on 03.01.2022, the respondent issued a notice (Form ASMT-10) regarding discrepancies between the petitioner's GSTR3B and GSTR2A. Following this, a show cause notice was issued. The petitioner failed to submit a reply to this notice, leading the respondent to pass ex-parte orders, which are now under challenge. The petitioner claims the failure to reply was due to bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition. It held that the impugned ex-parte orders, dated 27.12.2023, passed by the respondent were to be set aside. The Court reasoned that it was an undisputed fact that the petitioner did not respond to the show cause notice and the orders were passed without hearing the petitioner. Given the petitioner's assertion of bona fide reasons, unavoidable circumstances, and sufficient cause for not submitting the reply, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach. It deemed it just and appropriate to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner. The matter was remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration in accordance with the law, taking into account Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022. The petitioner was directed to appear before the respondent on 30.09.2024 to submit their reply and relevant documents, after which the respondent was to afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard and proceed further.
Key Issues
1. Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the respondent for the tax period 2017-18 are liable to be quashed on the grounds of non-compliance with principles of natural justice, particularly when the petitioner failed to submit a reply to the show cause notice due to bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances? 2. Whether the impugned orders are vitiated by the non-consideration of Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022 issued by the Central Government? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the ex-parte orders should be quashed because the failure to reply to the show cause notice was due to bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances. They argued that the matter should be remitted back to the respondent to provide an opportunity to submit a reply and for reconsideration. The petitioner also argued that the impugned orders were flawed due to the non-consideration of the aforementioned Central Government Circular. Respondent's arguments: The respondent supported the impugned orders, arguing that the petition lacked merit and should be dismissed, especially since the petitioner did not exercise due diligence in participating in the proceedings.
Sections Cited
None expressly mentioned, but the context relates to show cause notices and assessment proceedings under GST law.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: "A. The petitioner humbly pray this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the order dated 27.12.2023 bearing No. CTO/LGSTO-485/CLK/2023-24 (Annexure-B) passed by the respondent for the tax period 2017-18; B. The petitioner humbly pray this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the summary of order dated 27.12.2023 passed in reference No.ZD291223083778U (Annexure-C) by the respondent for the tax period 2017-18; C. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the interest of justice, in the petitioner's case." NC: 2024:KHC:37228
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for 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 March 2018 on 24.04.2018. On 03.01.2022, 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 orders at Annexure B and Annexure C, both dated 27.12.2023, which are assailed in the present petition.
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 NC: 2024:KHC:37228 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. 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.
A perusal of the material on record including the impugned orders will indicate that it is an undisputed fact NC: 2024:KHC:37228 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. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER i) The Writ Petition is allowed; ii) The impugned orders passed by respondent at Annexure B and Annexure C, both dated 27.12.2023, are hereby set aside; NC: 2024:KHC:37228 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 30.09.2024, 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 30.09.2024, the respondent shall afford a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear him and proceed further in accordance with law. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59
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.