BharatTaxGST

M/S Elite Estates vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/30548/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01064830202515 October 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR6 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. AJAY RAO, 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:41382 WP No. 30548 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. 30548 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S ELITE ESTATES, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT, NO.5, 2ND BLOCK, KHB BUILDING, 13TH CROSS, INDIRA NAGAR, BANGALORE - 38 REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER MR. JAMES PINTO …PETITIONER (BY SRI. AJAY RAO, ADVOCATE) AND: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT 5.13) DGSTO-5 B BLOCK, ROOM NO. 608, 6TH FLOOR, VTK2 BUILDING, RAJENDRA NAGAR, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 47. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. JYOTI M. MARADI, HCGP) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NAMELY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT-5.13) DGSTO-5, IN ASSIGNMENT NO. 2233 DATED 18.02.2025 AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41382 WP No. 30548 of 2025

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order passed by the Respondent namely Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-5.13) DGSTO-5, in Assignment No.2233 dated 18.02.2025 at Annexure-A. b) Grant such other relief/s that this Hon'ble Court deems fit in interest of justice and equity."

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent and perused the material on record.

3.

A perusal of material on record will indicate that respondent issued audit report dated 20.11.2024 under Section 73(1) of the KGST/CGST Act, 2017, to which the petitioner has replied by letter dated 16.09.2025. Subsequent thereto, respondent without considering the reply of the petitioner, proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 18.02.2025 under Section 73(9) of the KGST Act, 2017 confirming the total demand of Rs.7,58,69,180/- including the tax, interest and penalty.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41382 petitioner couldn't submit replies/ documents to neither the pre- intimation notice nor the show-cause notice under section 73(1) of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017 and resultantly couldn’t contest the proceedings. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner having no option has approached this Court by way of the present petition interalia contending that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit a reply to the pre-intimation notice and show-cause notice and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and submits that if one more opportunity is provided, by setting aside the impugned order, the petitioner would submit a reply to the show-cause notice and contest the proceedings.

6.

Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

7.

Though several contentions have been urged by both sides, the counsel for the petitioner submits that due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41382 petitioner did not file its reply/ documents culminated in the impugned ex-parte order.

8.

Under these circumstances, having regard to the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to submit replies and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, I deem it just and appropriate to adopt a justice oriented approach and provide one more opportunity to the petitioner by setting aside the impugned order dated 18.02.2025 remitting the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration of the matter afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting reply to the impugned show-cause notice dated 26.11.2024 by imposing cost of Rs.15,000/- on the petitioner payable to the High Court Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru.

9.

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is hereby allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.15,000/- by the petitioner HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41382 payable to the High Court Legal Services Authority, Bengaluru.

(ii) The impugned order dated 18.02.2025 passed by the respondent under 73(9) of the KGST Act, 2017 at Annexure – A is hereby set aside.

(iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting its reply to the notice dated 26.11.2024 issued under section 73(1) of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017. (iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent on 19.11.2025 without awaiting further notice from the respondent.

(v) The liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit replies, documents etc., which shall be considered by the respondent who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear them and proceed further in accordance with law. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41382 (vi) In the event, the Petitioner does not appear before the respondent on 19.11.2025 as stated supra, present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

MDS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 35

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.