M/S Ganesh Steels vs. Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is aggrieved by the Order-in- Appeal dated 28.05.2025 [Annexure-C] filed challenging the Adjudication Order dated 27.12.2023 [Annexure-B]. These orders are for the period from July 2017 to March 2018. The Adjudication Order is passed cconsidering the petitioner’s response dated 23.09.2023 and the refund of a certain amount in Form GST DRC -03 opining that the petitioner will be liable to pay interest and is not able to explain certain transactions.
Sri Renukaprasad C.M., the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the proceedings are concluded because of a mismatch between Forms GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A and that the petitioner could not respond to either the intimation in Form GST DRC-01A or to the Show Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01. The learned counsel invites HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010392192026 NC: 2026:KHC:36829 this Court’s attention to the following averment in the Memorandum of Petition.
“The Respondent No.2 has not properly served the hearing notices to the Peitioner. The Respondent No.2 has just uploaded the hearing notices in the GST portal. The Respondent No.2 has required to be served the notices to the registered address of the petitioner by seeking non- responsive to the earlier hearing notice. But without making effort to serve the hearing notices properly has dismissed the appeal for non- prosecution.”
Sri Renukaprasad also submits that the Board Circulars dated 27.12.2022 and 17.07.2023 are issued covering the subject tax period which envisage an opportunity to a Registered Taxable Person [RTP] to produce documents to establish the genuineness of the transactions even if those are not declared by the supplier. Sri K Hema Kumar, a HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010392192026 NC: 2026:KHC:36829 learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents, is heard for the disposal of the petition examining whether the petitioner must be extended another reasonable opportunity in view of the above.
The second respondent [the Appellate Authority] has referred to the First Notice dated 18.01.2025 and the subsequent notices, including the notice dated 06.03.2025, but observing that the petitioner has failed to appear. The appeal is rejected for non-appearance of the petitioner. The petitioner contends that the mismatch between Forms GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A can be explained with the support of the documents, and certificates as permissible in terms of the Board Circulars. The circumstances asserted by the petitioner and the terms of the Circular persuade this Court to opine that the petitioner must have another opportunity, and hence, the following: HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010392192026 NC: 2026:KHC:36829 ORDER
The petition is allowed and the Order of rejection of the Appeal dated 28.05.2025 [Annexure-C] is quashed subject to the following terms. [A] The appeal proceedings are restored to the second respondent for due consideration.
[B] The petitioner is permitted to file, along with the certified copy of this order, the copies of the documents to show the genuineness of the transactions.
[C] The petitioner shall produce these documents by 05.10.2026 and the second respondent shall consider these documents and HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010392192026 NC: 2026:KHC:36829 then conclude the proceedings by a reasoned order. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE
SA Ct:sr
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.