Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 26960 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: GEM GRANITES A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHRI RANGASAMY SEKAR SON OF SHRI RANGASAMY AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 120 GROUND FLOOR, HOODI APARTMENTS NEXT TO MOUNT CARMEL COLLEGE, CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU - 560 002 [email protected] MOB. 8971470774 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRADYUMNA HEJIB, ADVOCATE) AND: Digitally signed by CHANDANA
BM 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX Location: High NORTH DIVISION-3, Court of BENGALURU NORTH COMMISSIONERATE Karnataka GROUND FLOOR, NO. 59,2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, BND-3, RANGE NORTH DIVISION-3, BENGALURU NORTH COMMISSIONERATE GROUND FLOOR, NO. 59, …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AKASH B. SHETTY, ADVOCATE) -2- THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY SUCH OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT/S TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL (O10) BEARING NO. ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:- “(a) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any such other appropriate writ/s quash the impugned Order-in- Original (OIO) bearing No.19/2023 ND 3 (DIN: 2023115700000000EE1B) dated 28.11.2023 (Annexure-A) passed by the First Respondent;
(b) Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.”
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, the learned counsel
for the petitioner invited my attention to the impugned order in order
to point out that, the 1st respondent issued a notice dated -3- 20.10.2022 under section 73 of the I.T. Act. Subsequently, the petitioner filed its reply to the said notice on 21.11.2022. The counsel for the petitioner pointed out to the impugned order dated 28.11.2023 in order to show that the 1st respondent did not consider the reply dated 21.11.2022 filed by the petitioner and proceeded to pass the impugned order, thereby violating principles of natural justice and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of present petition.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents-revenue submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.
5. A perusal of the impugned order will indicate that the
petitioner filed its reply dated 21.21.2022 to the notice issued by the petitioner dated 20.10.2022 and that the 1st respondent has not considered the reply filed by the petitioner and has proceeded to pass the impugned order. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned notices, proceedings culminating in the impugned penalty order is violative of principles of natural justice and consequently, the impugned order deserves to be set aside by adopting justice oriented approach and by -4- directing the 1st respondent to consider the reply dated 21.11.2022 filed by the petitioner and thereafter proceed further in accordance with law.
6. In the result, I pass the following:-
ORDER
(i) The petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned order at Annexure-A dated 28.11.2023 passed by the 1st respondent is hereby set aside.
(iii) The matter is remitted back to the 1st respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of considering the reply date 21.11.2022 filed by the petitioner.
(iv) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit
his response/reply along with the documents to the 1st respondent, who shall consider the same and proceed further in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE MDS: List No.: 2 Sl No.: 35