M/S J N STONE PRODUCTS v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

(BY SRI. GAUTAM SHREEDHAR BHARADWAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ENFORCEMENT-06) SOUTH ZONE HAVING ITS OFFICE AT ROOM NO.408, 4TH FLOOR, B BLOCK, V.T.K -2 BUILDING, RAJENDRA NAGARA, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE – 560 047 (BY SRI. HEMA KUMAR K., AGA) …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 14.08.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY I.E., THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX BEARING NO.DCCT(A)-4.8/DGSTO-4/ADJ/2024-25 FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22. (ANNX-A, B AND C).GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DTD. 14.08.2024 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 73(9) OF THE KGST ACT, 2017 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY i.e. THE DEPUTY Digitally signed by NANDINI D Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13378 WP No. 36182 of 2024 COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX NO. DCCT(A)-4.8/DGSTO- 4/ADJ-/2024-25 FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2019-20, 2020-21, AND 2021-22 (ANNEXURE-A, B AND C). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

i) To issue a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned orders dated 14.08.2024 passed by the respondent authority, i.e., the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax bearing No.DCCT(A)-4.8 / DGSTO-4 / ADJ / 2024-25 for the financial year 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22 (Annexures A, B and C) ii) Grant any such other relief to meet the ends of justice and equity.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondent and perused the material on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Show Cause Notice under Section 73 of KGST Act and also Form GST-DRC- 01A dated 30.03.2024 were not communicated or served upon the petitioner and it was not aware of the said proceedings. So also, physical copies of the aforesaid notices were not communicated to the petitioner and consequently, it was not in a position to submit a reply to the same or contest the proceedings, which culminated in the impugned ex-parte - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13378 WP No. 36182 of 2024 orders. It is submitted that the petitioner was not aware of the impugned proceedings till the petitioner had approached the respondent seeking for issuance of fresh GST registration to restart its business. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit reply to the Show Cause Notice and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and submits that if one more opportunity is provided by setting aside the impugned order, the petitioner would submit a reply to the Show Cause Notice and contest the proceedings.

Per contra, learned AGA for the respondent submits that the notice of the impugned proceedings was issued to the last known e-mail address of the petitioner and submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

A perusal of the material on record discloses that the respondent has passed the impugned orders as a result of the ex-parte proceedings in which the petitioner did not contest and not submitted his reply to the show cause notice nor participated in the proceedings on account of the notice being served to the previous e-mail address of the petitioner, which the petitioner had stopped operating pursuant to the closure of the business of the petitioner. Under these circumstances, in - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13378 WP No. 36182 of 2024 the light of the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that the inadvertence and omission to appear before the respondent and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, it is just and appropriate to adopt a justice oriented approach and set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law by issuing certain directions.