D Kupendra Reddy vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner failed to respond to a show cause notice due to it being sent to a former consultant's email, leading to an ex-parte adjudication order. The petitioner's appeal against this order was rejected as time-barred.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner should be granted another opportunity to respond to the show cause notice and present documents, considering the circumstances and relevant Board Circulars.
Key Issues
Whether the petitioner was deprived of a reasonable opportunity to respond to the show cause notice and whether the appeal rejection due to limitation was justified.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 107, Section 169, Rule 100, Rule 142
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is aggrieved by [i] the Order dated 08.09.2025 [Annexure-A1] rejecting the petitioner’s appeal in No.GST.AP.397/2025-26 and [ii] the Adjudication Order dated 18.12.2023 [Annexure-B1]. These impugned orders are for the period July 2017 to March 2018. The Adjudication Order is premised in the assertion that the Show Cause Notice is issued to the petitioner, but he has filed no response.
Sri Venkatesh G., the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the proceedings are concluded because of a mismatch between Forms GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 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 this Court’s attention to the following averment in the memorandum of petition. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35170 “6. The said show cause notice was also not effectively served on the petitioner in accordance with Section 169 of the Act, as the same was sent only to the email address of the former consultant and not to the petitioner directly. Consequently, the petitioner was deprived of real opportunity to file a reply or present his case.”
Sri Venkatesh G 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 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 has referred to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 16.09.2023 HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35170 and the opportunity being granted in the following terms: “Therefore, Intimation of Tax/Penalty/Interest ascertained as being payable under section 73(5) of Central/State Goods and Service Tax Act 2017 was intimated to Taxable person by sending FORM GST DRC - 01A [Part-A] to the e-mail address provided to the department on 24-08-2023 and opportunity was provided to pay the Tax/Penalty/Interest. Further opportunity was also provided to file any submission against the Tax/Penalty/Interest ascertained in FORM GST DRC-01A [Part-A] within 15 days. Taxable person neither paid the Tax/Penalty/Interest nor filed any submission for the intimation of the Tax/Penalty/Interest ascertained.
Therefore, show-cause notice dated 16- 09-2023 under Section 73(1) Read with rules 100(2) and 142(1)(a) of Central/State Goods and Service Tax Act/Rules-2017 (Form GST DRC-01) was served to the RTP to the e-mail address provided to the department as per the provisions of section 169 of the KGST Act, 2017 by providing more opportunity to pay the interest within 30 days from the date of receipt HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35170 of show-cause notice. Further, an opportunity was also provided to file any submission for the Tax/Penalty/Interest quantified in the show- cause notice, taxable person neither paid the Tax/Penalty/Interest nor filed any submission for the show cause notice. Therefore, Taxable Person is hereby directed to make the payment of Tax/Penalty/Interest which are quantified in the show cause notice dated 16-09-2023 as detailed below within thirty days from the date of receipt of this order.”
The adjudication proceedings are closed because the petitioner has not responded, and the appeal is rejected on the ground of limitation observing that the delay beyond 120 days from the date of the Adjudication Order cannot be condoned in law. The petitioner’s appeal in No.GST.AP.397/2025- 26 is delayed by 248 days, and the petitioner asserts that because the Adjudication order is an ex-parte order, the appeal could not be filed within time. Further, the petitioner contends that the mismatch between Forms GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 can be explained with the support of the documents and HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35170 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.
ORDER
The petition is allowed and the Order of rejection of the Appeal dated 08.09.2025 [Annexure-A1] and the Adjudication Order dated 18.12.2023 [Annexure-B1] are quashed subject to the following terms.
[A] The proceedings are restored to the second respondent for due consideration with opportunity to file Response to the Show Cause Notice dated 16-09-2023. [B] The petitioner is permitted to file, along with the certified copy of HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:35170 this order, the response along with 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 then conclude the proceedings by a reasoned order. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA List No.: 3 Sl No.: 12
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.