BharatTaxGST

Anas Puthanveedi vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/13676/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01028074202515 October 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR3 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. SRINIVAS PRASAD K. V., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SMT. JYOTI M. MARADI, HCGP

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41467 WP No. 13676 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 13676 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: ANAS PUTHANVEEDI AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS S/O ABDUL RAHIM, PROPRIETOR OF M/S. A.K.TRADERS 8034, BANGALORE HONNAVARA ROAD, BIRUR - 577 116 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS PRASAD K. V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES SUVARNA KARNATAKA VANIJYA TERIGE BHAVANA, GOPALGOWDA LAYOUT, 60 FEET ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 205 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, ENFORCEMENT, SECOND FLOOR, SWAMY ARCADE, OPP. TO HDFC BANK, KUVEMPUNAGAR, HASSAN - 573 201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. JYOTI M. MARADI, HCGP) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH AND SETTING ASIDE THE SEALING

ORDER DCCT(ENF)/HSN/INS- AD2902250275047/2024-25 DATED 13.02.2025 (ANNEXURE-D) ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 WITHOUT JURI ICTION AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41467 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs: "a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing and setting aside the sealing order DCCT(ENF)/HSN/INS- ad2902250275047/2024-25 dated 13.02.2025 (Annexure -D) issued by Respondent No.2 without juri iction. b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing of Order No. DCCT(ENF)/HSN/INS-69/T.No.748 dated.15.04.2025 (Annexure-D) issued by Respondent No.2 confirming the demand of penalty equivalent to tax under section 122(1) (xx) section 73 or 74. c) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have failed to exercise the powers conferred upon them by the KGST Act, 2017 in deciding the Petitioner's Applications for de-sealing of godown and business premises, (Exhibit hereto), respectively is bad in law;"

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41467

3.

Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, having regard to the availability of equally efficacious alternative remedy before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 107 of the KGST/CGST Act, 2017, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to file an appeal before the First Appellate Authority in accordance with law.

4.

If such an appeal is filed by the petitioner within a period of six weeks from today, the entire period from the date of filing the present petition dated 21.04.2025 till today i.e., till 15.10.2025 shall be excluded for the purpose of Section 14 of the Limitation Act.

5.

Subject to the aforesaid directions and liberty reserved in favour of the petitioner, petition stands disposed of. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

MDS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 26

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.