M/S Fimer INDIA Private Limited vs. The State Of Karnataka - Karnataka High Court, 29 September 2022

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.10002 OF 2022(T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S FIMER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED SURVEY NO.7/2, GANGADHARNA PALYA, KASBAHOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT, BENGALURU(BANGALORE) RURAL, KARNATAKA – 562123 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, KN SREEVATSA, S/O K. NANJUNDAIAH AGED 51 YEARS. COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT OF 1956. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. P.B. HARISH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE – 560001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, NORTH-WEST DIVISION-3, BANGALORE- NORTH WEST COMMISSIONERATE, NORTH WING, 2ND FLOOR, BMTC COMPLEX, SHIVAJINAGAR BUS STAND, BENGALURU- 560051. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HEMAKUMAR, AGA FOR R1., SRI. JEEVAN.J.NEERALGI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 ) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE EX- PARTE ORDER DATED 31.03.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN REFERENCE NO.1/708592/2022 PASSED BY THE R-2 FOR BEING VIOLATIVE OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND PROVISION OF RULE 92(3) OF CGST RULES 2 THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: a. To issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ(s) suspending and quashing the ex-parte order dated March 31, 2022 in reference No.1/708592/2022 (vide Annexure-A) passed by Respondent No.2 for being violative of principles of natural justice and provision of Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules; b. To issue writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ(s) directing Respondent No.2 to accept the reply to Show Cause Notice dated March 15, 2022 and provide a hearing to the petitioner before adjudicating the Show Cause Notice dated March 15, 2022; (vide Annexure- D); c. To issue writ(s) and/or direction(s) in the nature of prohibition commanding the Respondent, their servants agents and/or subordinates from resorting to any coercive measure during the pendency of the writ petition before this Hon’ble Court; d. To issue order(s), direction(s), writ(s) or any other relief(s) as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice;

3 e. To award cost of this petition; and f. Pass any other order or give any other direction as this Honorable Court deems fit and appropriate in the circumstances of the case.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for respondent No.1 and learned counsel for respondent No.2 and perused the material on record.

In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the Memorandum of Petition and referring to the documents produced by the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner invites my attention to the show-cause notice dated 15.03.2022 issued by the respondents to the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to submit his response/reply and also to appear on 29.03.2022 for personal hearing. It is submitted that since the records were voluminous and the petitioner is not in a position to collate on the same to submit detailed response, petitioner submitted a representation on 28.03.2022 seeking extension of time as can be seen from Annexure- D, the screen shot of the said request for extension of time. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite specific

4 request made by the petitioner seeking extension of time, respondent No.2 has proceeded to pass the impugned exparte assessment order without providing requisite or sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, thereby violating principles of natural justice warranting interference of this Court by way of the present petition.

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

As rightly contended by learned counsel for the petitioner issuance of show-cause notice by respondent No.2 to the petitioner submitting his request for extension on 28.02.2022 despite which respondent No.2 has proceeded to pass the impugned assessment order without providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner in this regard. Under these circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and proper to set aside the impugned assessment order and remit the matter back

5 to the concerned respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 31.03.2022 vide Annexure-A passed by respondent No.2 is hereby set aside. (iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.2 for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. (iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit pleadings, documents etc., in support of his claim. (v) Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the pleadings, documents, etc., submitted by the petitioner and provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter proceed in accordance with law. JUDGE Bmc