BharatTaxGST

M/S Sri Mallikarjuna Engineering Works vs. The Union Of INDIA

Original PDF →
WP/1187/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01001658202618 February 2026Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. VISWANATH PATIL., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. MADANAN PILLAI, CGC FOR R1; SRI HEMAKUMAR, AGA FOR R2 TO R4

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9859 WP No. 1187 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 1187 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S SRI MALLIKARJUNA ENGINEERING WORKS NO.25/1B, SIDDAPPA LAYOUT CHURCH ROAD, BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA BENGALURU RURAL, BENGALURU-560 099 REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI.MOHAN KUMAR CHODIPANE PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERNED … PETITIONER (BY SRI. VISWANATH PATIL., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE NEW DELHI-110 001. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9859 WP No. 1187 of 2026 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES IN KARNATAKA VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA 1ST MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 009. 4. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER LGSTO-26, DGSTO-4 1ST FLOOR, V.T.K.-2, RAJENDRA NAGAR, 80 FT. ROAD, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 047 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MADANAN PILLAI, CGC FOR R1; SRI HEMAKUMAR, AGA FOR R2 TO R4) *** THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ADJUDICATION ORDER DATED 15.04.2024 FOR THE TAX PERIOD 2018-19 (ANNEXURE-B) CTO/LGSTO-26/DRC- 07/313VSIA/66/24-25 AND DECLARE AND STRIKE DOWN SECTION 16(2)(C) OF CGST /SGST ACTS AS BEING UNCONSTITUTIONAL, THE SAME BEING VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14 AND 19 AND 19(1)(G) OF THE CONSTITUTIONS OF INDIA AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9859 WP No. 1187 of 2026

ORAL ORDER Petitioner has called in question the correctness of the order of adjudication at Annexure-B dated 15.04.2024. Petitioner has also challenged the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST/SGST Act.

2.

When the matter is taken up for consideration, petitioner submits that he does not intend to insist on the prayer to declare Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST/SGST Act as being violative of the Constitutional provisions.

3.

Insofar as the plea regarding setting aside of the order at Annexure-B, it is contented that the order of adjudication is an ex-parte order and the petitioner did not have the benefit of reply to the show cause notice of the department. It is further submitted that insofar as the reconciliation between GSTR-2A and the input credit claimed in GSTR-3B, petitioner has material to demonstrate that the discrepancy as pointed out does not exist. It is submitted that the Court may set aside the HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9859 order and remand the matter back to the stage of reply to the show cause notice.

4.

Sri. Hemakumar, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the order is passed ex-parte only due to the lapse of the petitioner in not diligently participating in the proceedings. However, it is submitted that if the Court were to pass any order of remand, the Court may insist on the petitioner to pay 10% of the tax demand.

5.

Taking note that the order passed is an ex-parte order without the benefit of stand on merits of the petitioner to the show cause notice and also noticing the stand of the petitioner that they would be in a position to explain the discrepancy between the input tax credit as reflected in GSTR-2A and the input tax credit claimed under GSTR-3B, it would be appropriate to set aside the order of adjudication and remit the matter back to HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9859 respondent No. 4 for adjudication from the stage of reply to the show cause notice.

6.

Accordingly, the order at Annexure-B is set aside. The matter is remitted to the stage of reply to the show cause notice in terms of the observations made above. Petitioner to appear before respondent No. 4 without further notice on 16.03.2026. Needless to state, if the petitioner is absent on the said date, petitioner would forfeit the indulgence granted by this Court. Petitioner to pay 10% of the tax demand.

7.

Accordingly, petition is disposed of. (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP

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.