2025(01)LCX0572

Karnataka High Court

Drop Total Spirits Private Limited

Versus

The Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

WRIT PETITION NO. 1520 OF 2025 decided on 29-01-2025

NC

NC: 2025:KHC:4066

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

WRIT PETITION NO. 1520 OF 2025 (T-RES)

BETWEEN:

M/S. DROP TOTAL SPIRITS PVT. LTD.,
(M/S. DROP TOTAL SPIRITS),
REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS
OF THE GST ACT,
NO.2, REHANA COMPLEX,
NEW BEL ROAD, RMV EXTENSIONS,
BENGALURU-560 054.

(REPRESENTED BY ITS PROP:
RAVIKUMAR JONNA
AGED 46 YEARS).
                                                                        …PETITIONER
(BY SRI. K M SHIVAYOGISWAMY, ADV.)

AND:

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)
DGSTO-6, VANIJYA THERIGE SANKIRNA,
SIDDARAMESHWARA EXTENSION,
JAYANAGAR EAST,
TUMAKURU-572 103.
                                                                        …RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. SHIVAPRABHU HIREMATH, AGA)

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A) QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. NIL DATED 16.12.2023 PASSED U/S 73(9) OF THE KGST/CGST ACT, READ WITH RULE 142(1) OF THE KGSTD RULES 2017, VIDE GSTIN NO.29AETPJ7780F1ZS BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE- C, IN RELATION TO THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2017-18.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

ORAL ORDER

Learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.Shivaprabhu Hiremath accepts notice for respondents.

2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.K.M.Shivayogiswamy for petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate Sri.Shivaprabhu Hiremath for respondent. Perused the writ petition papers.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the impugned order bearing No.NIL dated 16.12.2023 passed under Section 73(9) of the KGST/CGST Act, 2017 (for short, ‘2017 Act’) read with Section 142(1) of the KGSTD Rules, 2017 (Annexure-C).

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had no notice whatsoever in respect of the proceedings initiated under Section 73 of 2017 Act. Learned counsel would submit that no notice was received by the petitioner apparently because the impugned order shows the GSTIN number of sole proprietorship of Mr.Ravikumar Jonna. Further, learned counsel would submit that the petitioner – a Private Limited Company GSTIN/UIN is as indicated in Annexure-A i.e., GSTIN/UIN: 29AADCD7853L1Z2. There is some discrepancy in issuing notice and in the said circumstances, petitioner has not received any notice and he could not participate in the proceedings initiated under Section 73(9) of 2017 Act.

5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate is not in a position to dispute the discrepancy in the GST registration number shown in Annexure-C, impugned order passed under Section 73(9) of 2017 Act.

6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the writ petition papers, I am of the view that due to issue of notice to wrong GSTIN number, there was no service of notice on the petitioner Company and the impugned order passed under Section 73(9) of 2017 Act is an exparte order.

7. Admittedly, the petitioner’s GSTIN number is No.AADCD7853L1Z2, whereas one Ravi kumar Jonna, proprietorship is also the holder GST registration under GSTIN bearing No.29AETPJ7780F1ZS (Annexure-B). Though the impugned order indicates the name of the taxable person as “M/s.Dop Total Spirits Pvt. Ltd.,” GSTIN is shown as Mr.Ravi kumar Jonna, Proprietorship. As the petitioner had no notice of the proceedings initiated under Section 73 of 2017 Act, the matter needs to be remanded to the respondent-Authorities for providing an opportunity to the petitioner and to participate further in the matter since it involves substantial right of the petitioner. Looking into the object of Section 75(4) of 2017 Act, the petitioner would be entitled for an opportunity. Hence, the following:

ORDER

a) Writ petition is allowed.

b) Impugned order at Annexure-C bearing No.NIL dated 16.12.2023 is quashed.

c) The mater is restored to the stage of fresh notice.

d) The petitioner is permitted to submit its reply within a period of four weeks from today, without raising ground of limitation since the matter is remanded by this Court to the stage of filing objections and thereafter the respondent-Authorities to proceed further in the matter.

e) All contentions of the parties are left open.

Sd/-       
(S.G.PANDIT)
JUDGE