BharatTaxGST

Ravi Trading Company vs. The State Of Karnataka

Original PDF →
WP/100576/2023HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC02001779202331 January 2023Bench: E.S.INDIRESH3 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. NARAYAN V YAJI, ADVOCATE

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - WP No. 100576 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 100576 OF 2023 (T-RES) BETWEEN: RAVI TRADING COMPANY NO.109, G.F.BEJJUVALLI TQ. TEERTHAHALLI, DIST. SHIVAMOGGA, BY ITS PROPRIETOR RAVIKUMAR K S/O. RANGASWAMY K …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NARAYAN V YAJI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE M.S.BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX (ENFORCEMENT 01) SOUTH ZONE, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, HUBLI ROAD, GADAG J MAMATHA Digitally signed by J MAMATHA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD Date: 2023.02.04 12:26:51 +0530 - 2 - WP No. 100576 of 2023 …RESPONDENTS (SRI. SHIVAPRABHU S. HIREMATH, AGA FOR RESPONDENTS) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORAR AND QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 09.01.2023 BEARING NO.ACCT/ENF/GDG/MOV-11/ 2022-23 ANNEXURE-A TO THE WRIT PETITION AS IT IS ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Learned counsel Sri. Shivaprabhu S. Hiremath, Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents.

2.

Learned Additional Government Advocate raised objection with regard to the maintainability of the petition and submitted that, the impugned order produced at Annexure-A is an appealable order and therefore, contended that, the petitioner be directed to exhaust the remedy available under the law.

3.

Per contra, Sri. Narayan V. Yaji, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that, the respondent-authorities ought not to have levied penalty WP No. 100576 of 2023

under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, under Section 20 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 3. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that, though the said aspect has been raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the same be agitated before the Appellate Authority in the appeal. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and leaving out the contentions open, the writ petition is disposed of.

4.

Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to avail such efficacious and alternative remedy available under law. JUDGE

SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11

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.