Additional Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes vs. Sri. Ghanshyamal Agarwal - Karnataka High Court, 11 November 2025

Heard together (2 matters)

WA No. 1179 of 2025

WP No. 9785 OF 2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45695-DB WA No. 1179 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 1179 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT SOUTH ZONE B BLOCK 2ND FLOOR ROOM NO.204 V TK -2 RAJENDRANAGARA KORAMANAGLA -560047 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ADITYA VIKRAM BHAT, AGA) AND: 1. SRI. GHANSHYAMAL AGARWAL S/O LATE SHIV NARAIN AGARWAL AGED 58 YEARS DIRECTOR OF M/S LAWRAGA METALS PRIVATE LIMITED Digitally Signed by REKHA R Location : High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45695-DB WA No. 1179 of 2025 RESIDING AT 460, 4TH MAIN 6TH CROSS JP NAGAR 3RD PAHSE BANGALORE 560078 2. COMMISSIONER OF CGST BENGALURU SOUTH ZONE BENGALURU 560047 …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.04.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU IN WP No. 9785 OF 2025; DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION IN WP No. 9785 OF 2025, FILED BY THE RESPONDENT No. 1 IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45695-DB WA No. 1179 of 2025

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD)

This Intra-Court appeal is against an interim order by a writ Court in W.P.No.9785/2025 on 02.04.2025. The appellant's grievance is with the following order.

“In the meanwhile, pending disposal of the petition, respondents are directed not to take precipitative/ coercive steps against the petitioner including arrest. However, respondents are entitled to proceed further with the investigation, and the petitioner would co- operate with the same and shall not tamper with the evidence, and the result of the investigation would be subject to the final outcome of the petition.”

The writ Court, while granting protection as aforesaid, has reserved liberty to the appellant to seek vacating or modification of such order. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45695-DB Mr. Aditya Vikram Bhat, the learned Government Advocate, arguing to support the request for condonation of delay in filing this Intra-Court appeal and on the merits of the appellant’s grievance, submits that the first respondent [who has jumped the wall in the literal sense] has approached the writ Court calling in question the pending inquiry and the summons issued but in the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, given the provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, it would not be just or reasonable to grant protection against arrest.

However, if the writ Court has granted some protection reserving liberty to the appellant [the second respondent in such proceedings] to seek vacating or modification, this Court is of the view that whether such protection could be must be answered in the same proceedings before an Intra-Court appeal could be entertained. Therefore, the application as HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45695-DB also the writ appeal stands disposed of without prejudice to the appellant to avail the remedy in terms of the liberty reserved. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE (T.M. NADAF) JUDGE