M/S Fonepaisa Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax

M/S FONEPAISA PAYMENT SOLUTIONS PVT LTD NO.1190, HEGDE NAGAR, 3^RD CROSS, 26^TH MAIN, J P NAGAR, PHASE -1, BENGALURU – 560 078. (REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR JEETENDRA NAGAVENKATA JOTHISWAROOP GANJANA BOINA)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M

¶14

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX (AUDIT) 3.6, DGSTO, BENGALURU – 560 027.

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SMT. JYOTHI M.MARADI, HCGP)

¶19

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE FOLLOWING ORDER UNDER SECTION 73(9) OF KGST/CGST ACT, 2017 BEARING NO.DCCT(A)3/DGSTO-3/ADJU-199/2024-25 DATED 17.06.2025 FOR ASSESSMENT PERIOD 2022-23 PASSED BY FIRST RESPONDENT-DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)-3.6, DGSTO, BENGALURU-27 IS PRODUCED HEREIN AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:42364 WP No. 29862 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶27

“(a) Order under Section 73(9) of KGST/CGST Act, 2017 bearing No.DCCT(A)-3/DGSTO-3/ADJU-199/2024-25 dated 17/6/2025 for Assessment Period 2022-23 passed by first Respondent-Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit)-3.6, DGSTO, Bengaluru-27 is produced herein as Annexure-A.

¶28

(b) Copy of Form GST DRC-07 bearing No.DCCT(A)3.6/DGSTO-3 under Section 73(9) (See Rule 100(1) 100(2) 100 (3) & 142(5) dated 26/3/2025 issued by first Respondent-Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit)-3.6, DGSTO, Bengaluru-27-Annexure-B.

¶29

(c) Endorsement issued by first Respondent – Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit)-3.6, DGSTO-3 Bengaluru -27 bearing No.DCCT/(Audit)3.6 … 2025-26 for period FY 2022-23 - Annexure-F.

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record.

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:42364 WP No. 29862 of 2025

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner filed its Return of Turnovers for tax periods April 2022 to March 2023. The respondent initiated proceedings u/s. 73(1) of the Act CGST/KGST Act, 2017 and issued intimation notice to the petitioner to file reply. Subsequently, the 1^st respondent issued show-cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 as per Section 73(1) of KGST Act, calling for explanation with regard to the difference in the unreconciled Turnover of GST liability declared in GSTR-9C of 2022-23. The petitioner filed its reply dated 21.06.2024 as well as further reply dated 12.08.2024 to the aforesaid show-cause notice. Pursuant to the same, the respondent without considering the reply filed by the petitioner and not providing the petitioner sufficient opportunity of personal hearing u/s. 75(4) of the Act proceeded to pass the impugned order at Annexure – A dated 17.06.2025, which is assailed in the present petition.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed its reply to the show-cause notice dated 06.06.2024 and the respondent without considering the said reply and without granting an opportunity of personal hearing has passed the impugned order at Annexure – A dated 17.06.2025 and the

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:42364 WP No. 29862 of 2025

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

impugned order deserve to be quashed and the matter remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration of the matter afresh in accordance with law by providing an opportunity to the petitioner to submit a reply to the show cause notice / produce necessary documents and thereafter to pass appropriate orders.

¶38

Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondents would support the impugned order and submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed especially when the petitioner did not exercise his due diligence in participating in the impugned proceedings.

¶39

A perusal of the material on record including the impugned order will indicate that it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner filed its reply to the show-cause notice and the impugned order has been passed without granting an opportunity to the petitioner to produce necessary documents. Under these circumstances, in view of the respondent failing to provide an opportunity for the petitioner to provide reasonable opportunity to produce necessary documents by adopting a justice oriented approach and in order to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned

¶40

5 -

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:42364 WP No. 29862 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

order and remit the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law by issuing certain directions.

¶44

In the result, I pass the following:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

i) The petition is hereby allowed ;

¶47

ii) The impugned order at Annexure – A passed by 1^st respondent dated 17.06.2025 is hereby set aside;

¶48

iii) Matter is remitted back to 1^st respondent for reconsideration afresh, in accordance with law.

¶49

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the 1^st respondent on 24.11.2025 , on which date, the petitioner shall submit its reply to the Show Cause Notice along with relevant documents.

¶50

v) Upon petitioner submitting reply along with relevant documents to the Show Cause Notice on 24.11.2025, the 1^st respondent shall afford reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear it and proceed further in accordance with law.

¶51

vi) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit pleadings, replies, documents etc., which shall be considered by the 1^st respondent, who

¶52

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:42364 WP No. 29862 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear them and proceed further in accordance with law.

¶55

vii) In the event, the petitioner does not appear before the 1^st respondent on 24.11.2025 as stated supra, the present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders.

¶56

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶57

SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6

M/S Fonepaisa Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Fonepaisa Payment Solutions Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Amanthrana Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Nanjammannamma Vs Smt Rajamma

Bunts Pakirappa Narayana Rai Vs Income Tax Officer, Ito Ward, Madikeri

Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Nagaraj Vs State of Karnataka

Rasha Kabeer Vs the State of Karnataka