Sri G M Ravindra vs. The State Of Karnataka

Held

The Court noted the submission by the learned Additional Government Advocate that the objections filed by the petitioner to the Demand Notice (Annexure-H1 dated April 23, 2018) would be considered, and an order would be passed within two weeks after giving an opportunity of hearing. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent authority on May 23, 2018, at 11:00 a.m. The respondents were instructed to consider the petitioner's objections after providing a hearing and pass orders in accordance with the law within two weeks from May 23, 2018. The demand notice dated April 21, 2018 (Annexure-H) was ordered not to be precipitated by the respondents until the objections were considered and orders were passed. The Court also observed that if any adverse order was passed, it would be open for the petitioner to challenge it in accordance with law. The writ petition was disposed of based on these directions.

Facts

The petitioner, Sri G. M. Ravindra, a Class-I contractor, entered into an agreement dated November 19, 2015, with the 5th respondent, the Executive Engineer, Storm Water Drain (KVP), Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction to respondents No. 2 and 3 (Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes) not to insist on payment of taxes under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, concerning this agreement. The petitioner also sought to quash a demand notice dated April 21, 2018 (Annexure-H). The learned Additional Government Advocate, on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3, submitted that the objections filed by the petitioner to the demand notice would be considered within two weeks after affording an opportunity of hearing.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents No. 2 and 3 should be directed not to insist on payment of taxes under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, in respect of the agreement dated November 19, 2015, between the petitioner and the 5th respondent? 2. Whether the demand notice dated April 21, 2018 (Annexure-H) should be quashed? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner sought directions to prevent the respondents from levying GST on the aforementioned agreement and to quash the demand notice. The specific grounds for these prayers are not detailed in the provided judgment excerpt. Revenue/State's Contentions: The learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the objections filed by the petitioner to the demand notice would be considered, and an order would be passed within two weeks after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. No specific arguments were made regarding the applicability of GST or the validity of the demand notice at this stage.