BharatTaxGST

M/S Chandra Raya M Devanagaon vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/200227/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC03012670202405 March 2025Bench: ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI DEVI PRASAD GANPATRAO AND SRI PRAKASH D., ADVOCATESFor Respondent: SRI MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, A.G.A

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1449 WP No. 200227 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 200227 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. CHANDRA RAYA M DEVANAGAON CONTRACTOR (A PROPRIETARY FIRM REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISION OF CGST/SGST ACT, 2017) R/O: GOGI K, SHAHAPUR – 585 309. (REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI. CHANDRARAYA MALLANNA DEVANAGAON S/O. MALLANNA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, …PETITIONER (BY SRI DEVI PRASAD GANPATRAO AND SRI PRAKASH D., ADVOCATES) AND: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT-5), 2ND FLOOR, ROOM NO.16, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KALABURAGI – 585 102. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI MALLIKARJUN SAHUKAR, A.G.A.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, OR SUCH OTHER WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT AND QUASH THE ADJUDICATION ORDER PASSED BY RESPONDENT Digitally signed by SHIVAKUMAR HIREMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1449 WP No. 200227 of 2025 IN ORDER NO.ACCT/A-5/KLB/FILE-108/ORDER/2024-25 DATED 19.07.2024 AT ANNEXURE-D AND REMIT THE MATTER TO THE RESPONDENT AND DIRECT FOR RE-ADJUDICATION OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE AT ANNEXURE-C DATED 23.05.2024 AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE)

1.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate.

2.

The petitioner is questioning the order dated 19.07.2024 marked at Annexure-D passed by the respondent authority under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Before passing the impugned order, a show- cause notice dated 23.05.2024 was issued to the petitioner.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the show-cause notice is sent only through E-mail which is one of the additional mode of service of notice prescribed under the Act to serve the notice. Unless the notice is served NC: 2025:KHC-K:1449 in physical form, service of notice is not complete and the petitioner submits that, he was not ware of the notice sent through E-mail. Thus, he would contend that, the reply was not issued and the proceeding was held and in terms of the order dated 19.07.2024 an ex-parte order was passed.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, on account of defective notice, the petitioner could not appear before the authority, as such, the writ petition is maintainable not withstanding an alternative remedy of appeal.

5.

Learned counsel for the respondent-State would contend that, notices have been issued on 17.05.2023, 13.05.2023 and 09.06.2023 to file reply to the audit observations. As such, it is his contention that, the petitioner cannot raise a grievance that there was no show-cause notice served on the petitioner.

6.

In reply to the aforementioned contention, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, these are the notices issued relating to observations made on the NC: 2025:KHC-K:1449 audit, however, there was no show-cause notice issued before passing the orders in terms of Annexure-D no show cause notice is issued as required under law.

7.

This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records.

8.

Nothing is forthcoming on record to show that, the show-cause notice was issued before initiating the proceeding in terms of order at Annexure-D in physical form to the petitioner. Hence, this Court is of the view that, proper notice is not served on the petitioner.

9.

Since the petitioner was denied of opportunity of hearing, the impugned order is set aside, without entering into the merits of the matter. Accordingly, the following order: ORDER

(i) The petition is allowed;

(ii) The impugned order dated 23.05.2024 marked at Annexure-C is set aside; NC: 2025:KHC-K:1449 (iii) The matter is remitted to the respondent- authority to consider the claim afresh;

(iv) The petitioner is permitted to file his response to the show-cause notice which he has now received from E-mail.

(v) It is made clear that, all contentions are kept open and nothing is expressed on the merits of the matter. (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

SVH List No.: 2 Sl No.: 30

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.