M/S Transsible vs. State Of Karnataka
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Transsible, represented by its proprietor Santanu Tribedy, filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench. The petitioner challenged a show cause notice dated October 19, 2022, bearing number ZAC-03/DVG/SMR-20/2022-23 T.NO.356/2022-23, issued by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Zone-3, Bangalore (Respondent No. 2). The notice was issued under the GST regime. The State of Karnataka, represented by its Chief Secretary, Department of Finance, was the other respondent. The petitioner sought to quash this impugned notice.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner should be granted liberty to file a reply to the impugned show cause notice. The reasoning was based on the submission made by the learned Additional Government Advocate, who relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Punjab Vs. M/s. Shiv Enterprises and Others. The Apex Court's decision, as presented to this Court, indicated that the appropriate course of action in such matters is to allow the assessee to respond to the show cause notice. Therefore, the Court reserved liberty for the petitioner to file their reply within a period of four weeks from the date of the order. Following the filing of the reply, the authority was directed to pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law. The writ petition was disposed of with this liberty reserved.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be permitted to file a reply to the show cause notice issued by the respondent-authority, considering the pendency of the writ petition challenging the notice itself? The petitioner argued for the quashing of the show cause notice. The revenue, through the learned Additional Government Advocate, relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Punjab Vs. M/s. Shiv Enterprises and Others (Civil Appeal No. 359 of 2023, decided on 16.01.2023). The revenue's contention, based on this precedent, was that the petitioner should be directed to file a reply to the show cause notice rather than having the notice quashed at this stage.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 100266 OF 2023 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S TRANSSIBLE PLOT NO 31 AGROTECH PARK NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT 587101 KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY PROPRIETOR SANTANU TRIBEDY S/O ASHIM KUMAR TRIBEDY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS OCCUPATION BUSINESS MEN R/O. B 708, ANJANTHA SEA BREEZE SECTOR 14, GURUDWARA, NAVI MUMBAI, AIROLI THANE MAHARASHTRA 400708 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RENUKAPRASAD C M.,ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE VIDANASOUDA, BANGALORE 560 001
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX ZONE -3, 8TH FLOOR VANIJYA TERIGE KARYALAYA -1 GANDHINAGAR BANGALORE 560 009, KARNATAKA …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SRI. SHIVAPRABHU S. HIREMATH, AGA)
J MAMATHA MAMATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD Date: 2023.02.08 10:20:52 +0530
- 2 - THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO IS
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.