BharatTaxGST

M/S Iceberg Foods Limited vs. Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax

Original PDF →
WP/24987/2024HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01052182202418 September 2025Bench: M.NAGAPRASANNA4 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI AKASH B.SHETTY, ADVOCATE

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37694 WP No. 24987 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 24987 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S ICEBERG FOODS LIMITED GSTIN 29AACCA6027EIZX SHOP NO 42, PROPERTY NO 102 HANUMANTHANAGAR MANCHANAYAKAYANALLI BIDADHI HOBLI REPRSENETED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE MR BISWA RANJITH TRIPATHY (UNIT HEAD) REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VIGNESH SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX 1ST FLOOR, BMTC BUS STAND KANAKAPURA ROAD, BANASHANKARI BANGALORE, KARNATAKA 560070 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI AKASH B.SHETTY, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37694 WP No. 24987 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSITITION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 14.08.2024 WITH RESPECT TO THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED IN THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO. 02/2022-23/DGGI/BZU DTD 22.04.2022 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT ANNX-A AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by an order dated 14.08.2024 in respect of proceeding initiated on issuance of a Show Cause Notice demanding certain amounts under Section 74(9) of Central Goods & Service Tax Act, 2017 r/w Section 20 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The penalty is also imposed thereon.

2.

Learned counsel Sri Vignesh Shetty appearing for the petitioner submits that the order of penalty has sprung without considering any of the contentions advanced by the petitioner in reply and without giving an opportunity of personal hearing. Learned counsel would take this Court through the statutory framework to contend that the personal hearing is the mandate of the statute to be granted to the persons prior to imposition of penalty. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37694

3.

Learned counsel Sri Akash Shetty appearing for the respondent would, though refute the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, is not in a position to dispute the legal position as is projected by the petitioner.

4.

In the light of the fact that the petitioner was not afforded a personal hearing nor the reply of the petitioner was considered prior to passing of the impugned orders, I deem it appropriate to remit the matter back to the hands of the respondent to consider the reply of the petitioner submitted to the Show Cause Notice and regulate its procedure thereon in accordance with law. The petitioner shall now furnish a fresh reply to the Show Cause Notice so issued initiating the proceedings against the petitioner. The respondent shall regulate its procedure thereafter. Order accordingly.

5.

For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER

i) Writ petition is allowed.

ii) The impugned order dated 14.08.2024 at Annexure-A is hereby quashed. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37694 iii) The matter is remitted back to the hands of the respondent for consideration afresh bearing in mind the observations made in the course of the order. (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

VM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4

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.