BharatTaxGST

Sri M B Arvind Kumar vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Original PDF →
WP/10012/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01019536202419 June 2024Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV6 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. SACHIN S. NAYAK, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. K. HEMAKUMAR, AGA

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Heard together (2 matters)

WP No. 10012 of 2024
WP No. 10006 of 2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:21897 WP No. 10012 of 2024 C/W WP No. 10006 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 10012 OF 2024 (T-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 10006 OF 2024 (T-RES) IN WP NO. 10012/2024 BETWEEN: SRI. M.B. ARVIND KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O. SRI. M.S. BASKAR, RESIDING AT NO. 12, KATRIGUPE, BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 085. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SACHIN S. NAYAK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (AUDIT)-3, DGSTO, MANGALORE, ADDRESS AT 4TH FLOOR, VANIJYA THERIGE BHAVANA, MAIDAN ROAD, MANGALURU - 575 001. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, LGSTO-270, MANGALORE, ADDRESS: 4TH FLOOR, VANIJYA THERIGE BHAVANA, MAIDAN ROAD, MANGALURU - 575 001. Digitally signed by V KRISHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:21897 WP No. 10012 of 2024 C/W WP No. 10006 of 2024 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, VANIJYA THERIGE BHAVAN, GANDHINAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. HEMAKUMAR, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 73(9) READ WITH SECTION 50, 122 OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX / KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICE TAX ACT, 2017 DATED 23/12/2023 BEARING SCN NO. DCCT(A) -3/51/2023-24 PASSED BY THE R1 INSOFAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., IN WP NO. 10006/2024 BETWEEN: SRI. SHANKAR SUBRAMANYA BHAT, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, S/O. SRI. K.S. BHAT, RESIDING AT NO. 309, 5TH MAIN, 3RD CROSS, NGEF EAST LAYOUT, SADANANDA NAGAR, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 038. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SACHIN S. NAYAK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (AUDIT)-3, - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:21897 WP No. 10012 of 2024 C/W WP No. 10006 of 2024 DGSTO, MANGALORE, ADDRESS AT 4TH FLOOR, VANIJYA THERIGE BHAVANA, MAIDAN ROAD, MANGALURU - 575 001. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER LGSTO-270, MANGALORE ADDRESS: 4TH FLOOR, VANIJYA THERIGE, BHAVANA, MAIDAN ROAD, MANGALURU - 575 001. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, VANIJYA THERIGE BHAVAN, GANDHINAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. HEMAKUMAR, AGA) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER UNDER SECTION 73(9) READ WITH SECTION 50, 122 OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX / KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICE TAX ACT, 2017 DATED 23/12/2023 BEARING SCH NO. DCCT(A) -3/51/2023-24 PASSED BY THE R1 INSOFAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:21897 WP No. 10012 of 2024 C/W WP No. 10006 of 2024

ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate Sri. K. Hema Kumar, accepts notice for the respondents.

2.

The present petitions have been filed calling in question the validity of the order under Section 73(9) read with Section 50, 122 of the Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST) Act / Karnataka Goods and Service Tax (KGST) Act, 2017 (for short 'the Act') dated 23.12.2023 insofar as the petitioners are concerned. The petitioners have sought for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.1 to delete the name of the petitioners from the order under Section 73(9) of the Act as they are the ex-Directors of the company and not the present Directors of the company.

3.

The fact as made out by the petitioners is that the petitioners were the Directors of the company and were subsequently removed from directorship of the company by proceedings dated 30.04.2018. It is submitted that there are certain inter-se disputes between NC: 2024:KHC:21897 the petitioners and the present directors. It is submitted that insofar as action of removal of the petitioners, proceedings are pending before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench. Further it is submitted that an ex-parte order has been passed under Section 73(9) of the Act determining total liability as per the order at Annexure-'A'.

4.

A perusal of the order at Annexure-'A' would reveal that the order is passed against the company.

5.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that no proceedings for recovery have been initiated and further submits that the order that is passed being one against the company, it is the stand of the revenue that recovery would be only as regards such of the directors who are liable as on the relevant date and as regard such aspect, petitioners would be afforded an opportunity before proceedings are initiated in furtherance to the order at Annexure-'A'. NC: 2024:KHC:21897

6.

Taking note of such stand, the grievance of the petitioners is taken note of as contentions are raised only

as regards the status of the petitioners as Directors as on the relevant date and not on the merits of the order passed under Section 73(9) of the Act.

7.

Accordingly, petitions are disposed off while taking note of the stand of the revenue that petitioners would be afforded an opportunity to put forth their case in the event the revenue seeks to proceed against the petitioners in furtherance to Annexure-'A'.

Accordingly, petitions are disposed off. JUDGE MCR

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.