BharatTaxGST

M/S Dhammanagi Developers Private Limited vs. Commissioner Of Central Tax

Original PDF →
WP/8593/2023HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01019153202315 March 2024Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR4 pages
For Petitioner: SMT. VEENA J. KAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. KAMATH AND KAMATH, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. AKASH B SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:10797 WP No. 8593 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 8593 OF 2023 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S DHAMMANAGI DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT 1956 NO 29/4, 5TH FLOOR, TRADE CENTRE RACE COURSE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR. HARSHA B DHAMMANAGI …PETITIONER (BY SMT. VEENA J. KAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. KAMATH AND KAMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX BENGALURU NORTH COMMISSIONERATE HMT BHAVAN, GANGA NAGAR, BENALURU - 560 032. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER NORTH DIVISION, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AKASH B SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSITITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 18.1.2023 ISSUED BY THE R-1 BEARING NO.GEXCOM/ST/ADJN/COM/243/2020-ADJN-COMMR-CGST BENGALURU AT ANNX-A AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL LETTER OF ADJUDICATION LEVIES ISSUED BY THE R-2 VIDE LETTER DTD 28.02.2023 AS PER EMAIL DTD 01.03.2023 AT ANNX-A1 AND BY ISSUING A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT IN THE NATURE OF A WRIT OF CERTIORARI. Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:10797 WP No. 8593 of 2023 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

1.

In this petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned adjudication order vide Annexure-A dated 16.01.2023 and the consequential letter vide Annexure-A1 dated 01.03.2023. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

3.

In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the order dated 23.01.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (N.C.L.T), whereby the moratorium imposed upon the petitioner – company was lifted / raised by the N.C.L.T. Learned counsel also points out that the said order has been communicated to the respondents by Insolvency Resolution Professional (I.R.P.) vide Annexure-F dated 10.02.2023. It is therefore submitted that by virtue of the subsequent event that had occurred subsequent to the impugned order vide Annexure-A dated 16.01.2023, the impugned order and the consequential letter deserves to be set-aside and the matter NC: 2024:KHC:10797 may be remitted back to the respondents for re-consideration afresh, in accordance with law.

4.

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

5.

As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a perusal of the order dated 23.01.2023 passed by the N.C.L.T would indicate that the application filed by the I.R.P was taken on record and the moratorium has been lifted / raised by the N.C.L.T. Consequently, in the light of the subsequent event that had transpired subsequent to the impugned order by virtue of the N.C.L.T passing the aforesaid order, I deem it just and appropriate to set-aside the impugned order and consequential letter and remit the matter back to the respondents for re-consideration afresh, in accordance with law.

6.

In the result, the following; ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) Annexure - A dated 16.01.2023 and Annexure - A1 dated 01.03.2023 are hereby set-aside. NC: 2024:KHC:10797 (iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondents for re-consideration afresh, in accordance with law. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to file the pleadings, documents etc., before respondent No.1, who shall provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and proceed further, in accordance with law. JUDGE

GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48

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.