BharatTaxGST

M/S. Micro Dynamics Water Proofing vs. State Of Karnataka

Original PDF →
WP/10176/2023HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01022342202322 June 2023Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. VENKATESH KUMAR S., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SMT. K.HEMAKUMAR., AGA FOR R1 TO R3

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2023:KHC:21611 WP No. 10176 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 10176 OF 2023 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. MICRO DYNAMICS WATER PROOFING 249, 1ST MAIN ROAD, RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, NANDINI LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560 096, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI. KARIBASAVESVAR PRAMOD. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH KUMAR S.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY AND PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT FINANCE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001. 2. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES KARNATAKA, VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 009. 3. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES LGSTO 050, DGSTO-6 2ND FLOOR, B BLOCK, 14TH CROSS, KIADB BUILDING Digitally signed by D HEMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2023:KHC:21611 WP No. 10176 of 2023 PEENYA, 2ND STAGE BENGALURU-560 058. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. K.HEMAKUMAR., AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIDE NO. ACCT/CTO/LGSTO-50/CTO/2022- 23, NO. 471/22-23, DTD 21/12/2022 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED U/S. 73(9) OF KGST ACT/CGST ACT, 2017 R/W SEC.6 OF CGST ACT, 2017 AND SEC.50 OF CGST ACT/SGST ACT, 2017 ISSUED BY THE R-3 BEING VIOLATIVE OF PRINCIPLES NATURAL JUSTICE AND BAD IN LAW. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioner has sought for writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the impugned order vide No.ACCT/CTO/LGSTO-50/CTO/2022-23, T.No.471/2022- 23 dated 21.12.2022 passed under Section 73(9) of KGST Act/CGST Act, 2017, read with Section 6 of CGST Act, 2017 and Section 50 of CGST Act/SGST Act, 2017 passed by third respondent.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised various contentions to the effect that he could not file GSTR-3B returns for the period of March, 2019 as the registration NC: 2023:KHC:21611 was cancelled and subsequently known only on 13.03.2020. It is submitted that soon thereafter GSTR-3B was filed on 17.03.2020 for the aforesaid period but was not taken into consideration in the light of Section 16(4) of CGST Act.

3.

In the light of the contention raised that there was a delay in considering the revocation application as a result of which, soon after the revocation of cancellation of registration, GSTR-3B was filed on 17.03.2020, such aspect requires factual appreciation. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order at Annexure - A within a period of 30 days from receipt of certified copy of this order.

4.

This order is passed taking note of the time spent before this Court and also the facts of this case where the petitioner states that question of filing the return in time did not arise due to the cancellation of registration and its subsequent revocation. If the appeal is filed within time NC: 2023:KHC:21611 prescribed above, the question of limitation ought not to be raised.

5.

The order is passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and shall not be treated as a precedent. Accordingly, the petition is disposed off.

All contentions are kept open. JUDGE

AG

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.