BharatTaxGST

Mky Alloys vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Central Tax.

Original PDF →
WP/13952/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01029852202614 July 2026Bench: B M SHYAM PRASAD4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. NARENDRA KUMAR J., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. SHISHIRA AMARNATH, ADVOCATE

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35946 WP No. 13952 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13952 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: MKY ALLOYS PLOT NO. 465, CORNER, HOBLI KORA, VASANTHANARASAPURA, 2ND PHASE INDUSTRIAL AREA, VILLAGE YALLADADLU, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU - 572103, KARNATAKA (REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER MR. SATHISH BHARDWAJ S/O SHIV DUTT SHARMA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS) UNREGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NARENDRA KUMAR J., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX., BENGALURU NORTHWEST COMMISSIONERATE, 2ND FLOOR, SHIVAJI NAGAR BMTC BUS STAND, BENGALURU-560051 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER/ SUPERINTENDENT, HQRS PREVENTIVE, BENGALURU NORTH WEST COMMISSIONERATE, BENGALURU-560070 Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35946 WP No. 13952 of 2026 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX CNWDS RANGE, BANGALORE NORTH WEST DIVISION 5 (TUMKUR DIVISION) 67/2, SGR COMPLEX, KUNIGAL, TUMKUR ROAD, SADASHIVNAGAR TUMKARU -572105 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHISHIRA AMARNATH, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE IMPUGNED BLOCKING ORDER DATED 17.10.2025 (REF. BL2910250000357) AND THE RESULTANT NEGATIVE BBALANCE CREATEDIN THE ELECTRONIC CREDIT LEDGER ENCLOSED AS ANNX-A. DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO FORTHWITH REVERSE THE NEGATIVE BLOCKING ENTRIES AND ALLOW THE PETITIONER TO UTILIZE THE ITC AVAILABLE IN THE ELECTRONIC CREDIT LEDGER. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner’s grievance is with the ex-parte decision to block the petitioner’s Input Tax Credit [ITC] as seen from the Electronic Credit Ledger [Annexure-A]1 in exercise of powers under Rule 86A

1 The block is as of 17.10.2025. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35946 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 [for short, ‘the Rules’]. This decision is taken when the petitioner is served with summons as contemplated under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 to produce documents. Both Sri Narendra Kumar J., the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Shishira Amaranath, the learned counsel for the respondents, propose to elaborate on the circumstances under which the summons are issued but the crucial question for examination is could the decision to block ITC available have been taken without the petitioner being extended an opportunity to show cause against the same. This question is no longer res integra with this Court's decision in M/s Shah Associates v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and Others [W.P. No. 14293 of 2026] holding that the decision to block ITC must be preceded by an HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35946 opportunity. In the light of the afore, the petition stands disposed of extending an opportunity to the petitioner to file a response against the decision to block ITC within a week from today calling upon the authorities to decide on such course of action after considering the response that the petitioner would file in terms of this liberty. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA Ct:sr

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.