BharatTaxGST

M/S B.G. Granites vs. Government Of Karnataka

Original PDF →
WP/8274/2020HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01017249202030 May 2022Bench: M.I.ARUN4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI.Y. C. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVFor Respondent: SRI.K.HEMA KUMAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2; SMT. VANITA K. R., ADV. FOR R3 [ABSENT]

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY 2022 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION No.8274 OF 2020 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S B.G. GRANITES SY NO.430/3, 9TH K M MYSORE ROAD BADANAGUPPE VILLAGE CHAMARAJANAGARA-571 313 REP. BY SRI SRIGIRI PARTNER ... PETITIONER (BY SRI.Y. C. SHIVAKUMAR, ADV.) AND: 1 . GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REP. BY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (KARNATAKA) DEPT OF COMMERCIAL TAXES VANIJAYA TERIGE KARYALAYA KALIDASA ROAD, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 009 2 . COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (ENFORCEMENT)-46, SOUTH ZONE VANIJAYA TERIGE KARYALAYA-II B BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 047 3 . THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX MYSORE ZONE, NO.S1 AND S2, VINAYA MARGA MYSORE RANGE, MYSORE-570 011 - 2 - 4 . SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX MYSORE RURAL DIVISION CHAMARAJANAGARA RANGE BHUJANGESHWARA BADAVANE CHAMARAJANAGARA-571 313 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.HEMA KUMAR, AGA FOR R1 & R2; SMT. VANITA K. R., ADV. FOR R3 [ABSENT]) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE INSPECTION PROCEEDINGS DATED 24.10.2019 ANNEXURE-A CONDUCTED BY THE R-2 AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO REFUND THE AMOUNT OF RS.48,00,304.00 THE AMOUNT PAID THROUGH FORM GST DRC-03 BY DEBITING THE CASH LEDGER OF THE PETITIONER, IN WHATEVER SHORT PERIOD AS THIS HONBLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

The petitioner is a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing and exports of Granite Slabs, Monuments and the like and it is a 100% export oriented unit. On 23.10.2019, the unit of the petitioner was visited and the books of accounts were examined by respondent No.2 for claiming wrong input tax credit. The adjudication proceedings subsequent to said inspection are yet to be initiated. Subsequent to the said inspection, the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.48,00,304/- towards reversal of input tax credit. The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner alleging that the said amount was paid under coercion as there was threat of arrest and the petitioner is not liable to pay the said amount to the respondent authorities.

2.

Per contra, learned AGA representing respondent No.2 submits that there was no coercion or threat of arrest against the petitioner and the said amount has been voluntarily deposited by the petitioner and it is clear from the letter issued by the petitioner which is annexed to the writ petition as Annexure – A.

3.

Be that as it may, during the course of the arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to adjudication if any, and subject to the result of such adjudication, the amount paid may be adjusted and upon adjudication, if the authorities were to come to the conclusion that petitioner was not required to deposit such amount, the petitioner may be permitted to adjust the amount paid towards future liabilities.

4.

Learned AGA has no objections for the same.

5.

Though represented, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 is absent.

6.

Hence, the following:- ORDER (i) Upon adjudication, if the authorities were to conclude that the petitioner is not liable to pay any of the amount deposited by it subsequent to 23.10.2019, the same shall be adjusted towards future liabilities of the petitioner in respect of GST. (ii) The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE

MH/-

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.