BharatTaxGST

M/S Coastal Tts Jv vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of

Original PDF →
WP/5853/2023HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01013622202328 February 2024Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR5 pages
For Petitioner: SMT. JINITA CHATTERJEE, ADVOCATE

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:8291 WP No. 5853 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.5853 OF 2023 (T-IT) BETWEEN: 1. M/S. COASTAL TTS JV (JOINT VENTURE OF M/S. TRANSTONNELSTROY LTD. AND M/S. COASTAL PROJECT PRIVATE LTD. INCORPORATED ON 11-04-2011 IN BUSINESS OF PROVIDING SERVICE OF CONSTRUCTION, DESIGNETC ON CONTRACT 3072, 14TH CROSS, 1ST FLOOR, SHASTRI NAGAR, BSK 2ND STAGE, BENGALORE-560 070 (GTIN:29AABAC0767C2ZO LGTO-121) REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR ASHOK SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O. SRI DARAPPA SHETTY. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. JINITA CHATTERJEE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)-3.1 ROOM NO.216, DGSTO-3 BMTC BUILDING, SHANTHI NAGAR BENGALURU-560 027. 2. THE PRINCIPAL/ COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX 1, QUEENS ROAD VASANTH NAGAR BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by VANDANA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:8291 WP No. 5853 of 2023 (BY SMT. JYOTI M. MARADI, HCGP FOR R.1; SRI JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADVOCATE FOR R.2.) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR A DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING AND REFRAIN FROM IMPLEMENTING THE DEMAND ALONG WITH INTEREST AND PENALTY OF FORM GST DRC-07 IN INVOKING SECTION 73(9) OF THE ACT DATED 10.11.2022 BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 (ANNEXURE-H) AND ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR A DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING THE JURISDICTIONAL OFFICER (RESPONDENT NO.2) TO CONDUCT THE PROCEEDING IN ORDER TO PASS THE APPROAPRIATE ORDER AFRESH BY PROVIDING REASONABLE ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

1.

In this petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned adjudication order at Annexure-H dated 10.11.2022 issued in FORM GST DRC-07 under Section 73(9) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and for other reliefs.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned HCGP for respondent no.1, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and perused the material on record.

3.

In addition to reiterating various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, the learned counsel NC: 2024:KHC:8291 for the petitioner invited my attention to the detailed reply dated 05.08.2021 submitted by the petitioner to the audit observation notice as well as to the show cause notice in order to point out that various contentions urged by the petitioner and documents produced by it have not been considered/appreciated properly by respondent no.1-Deputy Commissioner before passing the impugned order, which is violative of the principles of natural justice and the same deserves to be set aside by remitting the matter back to respondent no.1 for reconsideration afresh and by providing one more opportunity to the petitioner to appear before respondent no.1 and file additional documents, objections etc. in support of its claim. It is therefore submitted that the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 deserves to be set aside and the matter requires to be remitted back to respondent no.1 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

4.

Per contra, the learned HCGP for respondent No.1 submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

5.

A perusal of the reply dated 05.08.2021 to the audit observation notice as well as to the show cause notice issued by NC: 2024:KHC:8291 respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner will clearly indicate that while passing the impugned order, various contentions / grounds / objections urged by the petitioner and the documents relied upon by it have not been considered/appreciated properly by respondent No.1, as a result of which, the impugned order being unreasoned and non-speaking order without proper application of mind and without providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner is violative of the principles of natural justice warranting interference by this Court in the present petition.

6.

Under these circumstances, though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, without expressing any opinion on merits/demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

7.

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is hereby allowed; (ii) The impugned adjudication order dated 10.11.2022 at Annexure-H passed by respondent no.1 is hereby set aside; NC: 2024:KHC:8291 (iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law; (iv) Petitioner is directed to appear before respondent No.1 on 18.04.2024 without awaiting further notice from respondent No.1; (v) Liberty is granted in favour of the petitioner to file additional pleadings, documents etc. before respondent No.1, who shall provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from 18.04.2024; (vi) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. JUDGE

hkh.

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.