M/S S B Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: AND
The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the adjudication order at Annexures-C & D and consequently sought for restraining the respondent to carryout recovery proceedings.
It is the case of petitioner that though Notice had been served through Email-ID, the petitioner was unable to respond due to bonafide reasons and requests for an opportunity to put-forth his case on merits before the Adjudicating Authority on the ground that the petitioner has a good case on merits and would demonstrate the discrepancy between the FORM GSTR-2A and FORM GSTR-3B.
Sri. K.Hema Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate draws attention to the Assessment Order and submits that several opportunities have been granted. But however, admits that the order is passed in light of non-explanation of the petitioner.
Taking note of the contention raised by the petitioner as well as the submission made that they have a good case on merits, it would meet the ends of justice by NC: 2024:KHC:26696 WP No. 15710 of 2024 relegating the petitioner to the stage of reply to show-cause Notice. In light of the same, the order at Annexures-C and D are set aside and the matter is relegated to the stage as referred to above.
In light of the order at Annexures-C and D being set aside, consequential proceedings taken for enforcement of the demand by way of attachment of the Bank Account as evidenced at Annexure-E is set aside. The petitioner to appear before the respondent and make out his reply on 25.07.2024. JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 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.