M/S Amnesty International INDIA Private Private LTD vs. The State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
In all the above matters, the petitioner is before this Court challenging the order passed under Section 74(9) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the KGST Act’ for short) by virtue of which the petitioner had been directed to make payment of dues along with penalty as indicated therein. The petitioner had sought to challenge the same by way of an appeal filed on HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24242
2022 in terms of Annexure – Q. However, the petitioner could not make payment of 10% statutory pre-deposit on account of the bank accounts of the petitioner having been frozen in certain other proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. As such, the appeal was not taken up for consideration.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequently, the proceedings against the petitioner under the PMLA have been answered in favour of the petitioner and the Bank accounts have now been defrozen. Now the petitioner has the monies to make payment of the statutory pre-deposit. Her submission is that since the appeal had been filed in the year 2022, there would be requirement for a direction to be passed to the respondents to accept the said pre-deposit amount and consider the appeal on merits. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24242
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that if the pre-deposit is made, the appeal would be considered on merits.
The said submission of learned counsel for respondents answers the grievance of the petitioner. As such, I pass the following: ORDER i) I.A.No.1/2025 is allowed. ii) The petitioner is permitted to make deposit of the statutory pre-deposit of 10% with respondent No.3, who shall thereafter consider the appeal filed by the petitioner and proceed with the same in accordance with law. iii) The petitioner was not capable of making payment of the pre-deposit on account of the freezing of the Bank accounts of the petitioner, the time from the date of freezing of the accounts to the date requesting a copy of the present order, shall be excluded from consideration of the period of limitation as regards the filing of the appeal filed by the petitioner. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24242 iv) With the above observation, the writ petitions stand disposed of. (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
KTY List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13
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.