BharatTaxGST

M/S Pearlite Developers vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/22494/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01048289202416 October 2024Bench: M.I.ARUN5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI RAVISHANKAR S V., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI HEMA KUMAR K., AGA

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:41812 WP No. 22494 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 22494 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S. PEARLITE DEVELOPERS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTD BY ITS PARTNER VENKATA SUBBA REDDY NANDIGIRI AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS S/O VENKATA SUBBA RELIABLE LAKEDEW RESIDENCY HARALUR ROAD H S R LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI RAVISHANKAR S V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES LGSTO-17, DGSTO-04, 2ND FLOOR RAJENDRANAGAR, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 047. 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ADMN) DGSTO-04, VTK2, A BLOCK 1ST FLOOR, RAJENDRANAGAR KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 047. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI HEMA KUMAR K., AGA) Digitally signed by CHAITHANYA K Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:41812 WP No. 22494 of 2024 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER OF ADJUDICATION DATED 16.12.2023 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 73(10) R/W SECTION 73(9), SECTION 50 AND SECTION 122(2)(a) OF THE IGST AND CGST ACTS, 2017 BEARING ORDER NO.ZD290923046629R FOR THE TAX PERIOD JULY 2017 TO MARCH 2018, HEREIN ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A, ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

ORAL ORDER

1.

Aggrieved by the impugned order dated 16.12.2023 passed by the first respondent vide Annexure-'A' to the writ petition, the petitioner has preferred this petition.

2.

Petitioner was registered under the provisions of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. On the ground that the petitioner has wrongly claimed transitional credit, proceedings have been initiated against him and the impugned order has been passed. The impugned order reveals that notices were issued to the petitioner by way of his registered E-mail and inspite of service of it, he has NC: 2024:KHC:41812 neither replied nor participated in the proceedings initiated against him.

3.

The case of the petitioner is that he has closed down his business prior to issuance of show cause notice and the said Email-ID was not in operation when the alleged notices were issued and hence, he has not received the notices and if given an opportunity, he would demonstrate that he has not committed any error in claiming the transitional credit. On the said ground, he prays that the writ petition be allowed and the impugned order be set aside.

4.

Per contra, the learned AGA appearing for the respondents upon instructions submits that notices have been served on the petitioner and he further submits that the order under challenge is an appealable order and he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

5.

Admittedly, the petitioner was in the business of construction and development of properties and he was registered under the provisions of the Central Goods and NC: 2024:KHC:41812 Services Tax Act, 2017 / Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He had a registered E-mail ID which was provided to the Authorities concerned for communication purposes. Irrespective of him closing down the business, it is his responsibility to keep the said E-mail active and any services done on the said E-mail has to be treated as sufficient notice under the given facts and circumstances of the case. However, as the order is passed without hearing the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that it would be appropriate in the interest of justice to set aside the same by imposing cost on the petitioner and remand the matter back to first respondent. Hence, the following: ORDER i. The impugned order dated 16.12.2023 bearing No.ZD290923046629R passed by the first respondent vide Annexure-'A' to the writ petition is hereby set aside. ii. Petitioner is directed to pay a cost of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand NC: 2024:KHC:41812 only) to the Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, within a period of three weeks from today. iii. The matter stands remanded back to first respondent and is restored to the stage of show cause notice dated 26.09.2023 and petitioner shall appear before first respondent on 12.11.2024 at 2.30 p.m. without further notice. iv. Respondent No.1 after hearing the petitioner shall dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible. v. The writ petition is disposed of. (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7

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.