BharatTaxGST

M/S. Hyperartho Industries vs. The Assistant Commissioner Commercial Taxes (Audit)-3.7, Dgsto-03

Original PDF →
WP/6787/2026HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01015401202603 March 2026Bench: S SUNIL DUTT YADAV4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. VEERESH MAHESH UPPIN., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. HEMA KUMAR, AGA

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12849 WP No. 6787 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 6787 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. HYPERARTHO INDUSTRIES, PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.42/1, MARENAHALLI, TANKBUND LOCK JAYANAGAR, NEAR JAI BHARATH TENT HOUSE, JAYANAGAR 5TH BLOCK, BANGALORE-560041, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, CHAKRAVARTHY. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VEERESH MAHESH UPPIN., ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)-3.7, DGSTO-03, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)-3.7, DIVISIONAL GOODS AND SERVICES, TAX OFFICE-3, 2ND FLOOR, BMTC COMPLES, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560027. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. HEMA KUMAR, AGA) Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12849 WP No. 6787 of 2026 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 18.12.2023 BEARING NO.ACCT(A)-3.7/DGSTO-3/DRC- 07-HYPERARTHO INDUSTRIES/2023- 24 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-C) AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondent.

2.

The petitioner has called in question the correctness of the order at Annexure-C which is the Order- in-Original. It is the case of the petitioner that the proceedings under Section 73(9) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'the Act') have concluded in an order without benefit of any reply by the petitioner.

3.

It is submitted that non-participation in the proceedings and not making out reply was due to genuine reasons, as there were certain civil disputes amongst the HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12849 family members. It is submitted that if an opportunity is granted and the order is recalled and remitted to the stage of reply to the show-cause notice, petitioner would demonstrate the discrepancy as noticed between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A, does not exist.

4.

Perusal of the order passed under Section 73(9) of the Act would indicate that the order is passed without any benefit of the reply of petitioner.

5.

In light of the stand of the petitioner that they have material to demonstrate that the discrepancy as noticed does not exist, it would be appropriate to set aside the order at Annexure-C and remit the matter back to the stage of reply to show-cause notice. In light of the delay in challenging the order, petitioner is put on terms and is to make payment of 20% of the demand raised to the respondent authority. Such payment made would be subject to adjudication to be made. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12849

6.

Petitioner to mark his presence before the respondent without further notice on 07.04.2026. Petitioner to pay 20% of the demand as ordered by 07.04.2026. 7. Accordingly, petition is disposed of. All contentions are kept open. (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) 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.