Bagepalli Keshavappa Manjunath vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Tax

Heard Sri. Aryaman Ghulati, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. K.Hemakumar, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent. Perused the writ petition papers.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the order passed under Section 73(10) read with Section 73(9) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short '2017 Act') at Annexure-A bearing No.ACCT/LGSTO-81/3B vs R9/2023-24 dated 22.12.2023. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the said order is an ex-parte order and in that regard he invites attention of this Court to Annexure-D NC: 2025:KHC:8383 dated 15.12.2023, Reminder issued by the respondent to the petitioner. He submits that the Reminder dated 15.12.2023 (Annexure-D) would not indicate the date of personal hearing though the notice indicates the petitioner to appear before the Authority on the date, time and venue, if mentioned in the Reminder. Learned counsel further submits that the date of personal hearing is not mentioned but subsequently, impugned adjudication order is passed at Annexure-A under Section 73(10) read with Section 73(9) of 2017 Act. Thus, learned counsel would pray for an opportunity to file objection and to participate in the proceedings.

Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that the petitioner has failed to file reply/objection and participate in the proceedings. Having failed to participate in the proceedings by filing objection, now he cannot contend that the impugned order passed is in violation of principles of natural justice. He further inviting attention of this Court to Annexure-D submits that the petitioner was given time to submit his reply till 19.12.2023. As the petitioner failed to file objection to show-cause notice, the respondents proceeded to pass orders in terms of Annexure-A. However, NC: 2025:KHC:8383 learned AGA submits that this Court could remand the matter directing the petitioner to pre-deposit reasonable amount taking note of the amount determined under Annexure-A.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, it is seen that the petitioner is a registered dealer of Electric Motors and Generators. It is the case of the petitioner that though the petitioner received show-cause notice has not filed objection, but was entitled for personal hearing. The Reminder at Annexure-D though provides time till 19.12.2023 to file reply would not indicate the date of personal hearing. As the substantial right of the petitioner is involved, the request of the petitioner to file objection and participate in the proceedings appears to be reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. But the said opportunity cannot be without any condition.

In view of the above circumstances, the following: ORDER

The petitioner shall pre-deposit 25% of the amount determined i.e., a sum of Rs.13,50,744/- within four weeks from today. (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE