M/S Star Steels vs. State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: “a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order passed u/s 86A R/w 16 of the KGST/CGST Act, blocking credit ledger of the Petitioner at ANNEXURE-C vide order No.ACCT/LGSTO-75/ITC BLOCK/25/2025-26 dated 26/05/2025 passed by the Respondent-2 in so far as the petitioner is concerned.
B) Issue Writ of Mandamus or Writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the resp-3 to withdraw the negative blocking of the Electronic credit ledger of the petitioner as per ANNEXURE-C vide order dated 26/05/2025 in so for as the petitioner is concerned. C) Issue any other directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to pass in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity including the cost of the Writ Petition.”
Heard Smt. Neha Alur and Sri Atul Krishna Rao Alur, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri K. Hema Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondents. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37481
The petitioner is calling in question an order dated 25.05.2025, passed under Sections 86A r/w. 16 of the KGST / CGST, Act, blocking the credit ledger of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner projects one solitary circumstance for entertainment of the petition at this juncture, is that, the proceedings were ex-parte.
Learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that notices were issued to the petitioner but the petitioner refused to appear before the Authority. Since the notices are issued, the assessment order should not be quashed, but an opportunity may be granted to the petitioner.
A perusal of the order impugned would also indicate that the proceedings is indeed ex-parte.
In the light of the said submission, I deem it appropriate to sustain the impugned order in the peculiar facts of this case and remit the matter back to the hands of respondent No.2 to hear the petitioner and pass necessary orders in accordance with law. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37481
In the light of the said circumstance, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to hear the petitioner and pass necessary orders in accordance with law.
For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER a. The writ petition stands disposed. b. The impugned order dated 26.05.2025, passed by respondent No.2 stands sustained, however, subject to the result of what respondent No.2 would do after hearing the petitioner, as held hereinabove. c. The petitioner shall appear before respondent No.2 on 26.09.2025 at 02.30 p.m. and submit the reply to the show cause notice so issued, to respondent No.2, who shall consider the same and pass necessary orders, in accordance with law, within four weeks thereafter. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37481 d. The consequential actions pursuant to the impugned order would remain, subject to the result of the orders that would be passed by respondent No.2. (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE
NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33 CT:SS
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.