M/S Karnataka Power Corporation Limited Vs Union of India

M/S KARNATAKA POWER CORPORATION LIMITED NO 82 SHAKTHI BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE 560 001, REP BY SHRI GAURAV GUPTA MANAGING DIRECTOR AGE ABOUT 58 YEARS IT IS A LIMITED COMPANY (STATE GOVERNMENT UNDERTAKING)

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR K. S, ADVOCATE AND SRI. DAKSHINA MURTHY, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE

¶16

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI – 110 001 (REP BY THE FINANCE SECRETARY)

¶17

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX BANGALORE NORTH GST COMMISSIONERATE NO 56 HMT BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BENGALURU 560 032

¶18

THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS II), TJRAFFIC TRANSIT MANAGEMENT CENTRE BMTC BUILDING 4^TH FLOOR ABOVE BMTC BUS STAND

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:54572 WP No. 34484 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

DOMLUR OLD AIRPORT ROAD

¶23

BENGALURU 560 071

¶24

THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE BENGALURU

¶25

ZONAL UNIT OFFICE OF THE

¶26

PRINCIPAL ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL NO 112 S P ENCLAVE ADJACENT TO KARNATAKA BANK K H ROAD BENGALURU 560 027

¶27

THE STATE OF KARNTAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU 560 001

¶28

REP.BY ITS FINANCE SECREARY

¶29

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES LGSTO 20 DGSTO 01 NO 19/3 2^ND FLOOR CUNNINGHAM ROAD

¶30

BENGALURU 560 052

¶31

…RESPONDENTS]

¶32

(BY SRI.JEEVAN J.NEERALAGI,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; SMT.JYOTI M.MARADI, HCGPFOR R5 AND R6)

¶33

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO MODIFY THE ORDER-IN-APPEAL NO.35/2024- 25 GST (COMMR.) A-II DATED 6.2.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN ANNEXURE G AND SET ASIDE THE ADJUDICATION LEVIES CONFIRMED THEREIN AS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY, UNSUSTAINABLE AND CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF CGST ACT AND KGST ACT, 2017 AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

¶34

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶35

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

¶36

3 -

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:54572 WP No. 34484 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

ORAL ORDER

¶40

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶41

A. Issue a writ of certiorari or such other Writ, Order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to modify the Order-in-Appeal No.35/2024-25 GST (Commr.) A-ll dated 6.2.2025 passed by the Respondent No.3 in Annexure- G and set aside the adjudication levies confirmed therein as illegal, arbitrary, unsustainable and contrary to the provisions of CGST Act and KGST Act, 2017 and unconstitutional..

¶42

B. Quash the Show Cause Notice in DGGI F.No:Va/38/2020-21/DGGI/BZU, O.R.No.142/2020-21 GST, SCN No.20/2022-23-BZU, DIN 202206D5500000015040 dated 30.6.2022 issued by Respondent No.4 in Annexure B and Summary Show Cause Notice in Form DRC-01 vide DIN No.202206DS500000015040, No. DGGI:Va/38/2020-File 21/DGGI/BZU/4876/2022, Case ID No.142/2020-21(GST) dt.30.6.2022 in Annexure B-1 issued by Respondent No.4.

¶43

C. Quash the Order-in-Original No.13/2024-25/GST/JC dt 17.5.2024 passed by Respondent No.2 in Annexure E and Summary Order in Form DRC-07 Reference No.ZD2908240623718 dt.17.8.2024 issued by the Respondent No. 6 in Annexure E-2.

¶44

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:54572 WP No. 34484 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

D. Hold that the levy of GST on royalty, guarantee commission and other amounts are unconstitutional and illegal.

¶47

E. Pass such other order or orders, directions and writs as this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interests of justice, including the costs of this writ petition.

¶48

Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, the issue in controversy between the parties is directly and squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of M/S Pramur Homes And Shelters Vs. The Union of India and Ors. in WP No.33081/2025 dated 11.12.2025.

¶49

In the said judgment, this Court formulated two points for consideration, which reads as under:

¶50

(i) Whether clubbing/consolidation/bunching/ combining of multiple tax periods/financial years in a Single/Composite Show cause notice issued under Section 73 / 74 of the CGST/ KGST Act , 2017 is permissible and valid in law?

¶51

(ii) Whether the impugned Show cause notice dated 30.09.2025 issued by the 4^th respondent to the

¶52

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:54572 WP No. 34484 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

petitioner for the tax periods/financial years from 2019-20 to 2023-24 under Section 74 of the CGST/ KGST Act, 2017 warrants interference by this Court in the present petition?

¶55

Issue No.1 was answered by this Court in favour of the

¶56

petitioner by holding as under:

¶57

Point No.(i) is accordingly answered in favour of the petitioner/tax payer/assessee by holding that clubbing/ consolidation/ bunching/ combining of multiple tax periods/financial years in a Solitary/Single/Composite Show cause notice issued under Section 73/74 of the CGST/KGST Act is illegal, invalid, impermissible and without jurisdiction or authority of law and contrary to the provisions of the CGST/KGST Act.

¶58

So also point No.2 was also answered by this Court in

¶59

favour of the petitioner by quashing the impugned Show Cause Notice by holding as under:

¶60

“Re: Point No.(ii);

¶61

9. While dealing with Point No. (i) supra, I have already come to the conclusion that clubbing /

¶62

6 -

¶63

NC: 2025:KHC:54572 WP No. 34484 of 2025

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

consolidation / bunching/ combining of multiple tax periods/financial years in a Solitary/Single/Composite Show cause notice issued under Section 73 / 74 of the CGST / KGST Act is illegal, invalid, impermissible and without jurisdiction or authority of law and contrary to the provisions of the CGST / KGST Act. In the instant case, a perusal of the impugned Show cause notice dated 30.09.2025 will indicate that the same encompasses and pertains to multiple tax periods/financial years, viz., from 2019-20 to 2023-24, which is impermissible in law and consequently, the impugned Show cause notice and all further proceedings pursuant thereto are also vitiated and deserve to be quashed reserving liberty to the respondents to initiate any action/proceedings in accordance with law.

¶66

Point No.(ii) is also accordingly answered in favour of the petitioner/tax payer/assessee by holding that the impugned Show cause notice dated 30.09.2025 issued by the 4^th respondent to the petitioner for the tax periods/financial years from 201920 to 2023-24 under Section 74 of the CGST/KGST Act is illegal, invalid, impermissible, arbitrary and without jurisdiction or authority of law and contrary to the provisions of the CGST/KGST Act and the impugned show cause notice and all further

¶67

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:54572 WP No. 34484 of 2025

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

proceedings, orders, notices pursuant thereto deserve to be quashed by reserving liberty in favour of the respondents to initiate proceedings in accordance with law.

¶70

10. In the result, I pass the following:

¶71

ORDER

¶72

(i) Petition is hereby allowed.

¶73

(ii) The impugned show-cause notice at Annexure-A dated 30.09.2025 issued by respondent No.4 and all further proceedings, orders, notices etc., pursuant thereto initiated/to be initiated by the respondents are hereby quashed.

¶74

(iii) The respondents are however reserved liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law and if such proceedings are initiated by the respondents, petitioner would be entitled to contest / defend the same in accordance with law.”

¶75

The issue in controversy involved in the present petition also relates to clubbing/consolidation/bunching/combining of multiple tax periods/financial years/block periods in a Single/Composite Show cause notice, which has already been held

¶76

8 -

¶77

NC: 2025:KHC:54572 WP No. 34484 of 2025

¶78

HC-KAR

¶79

to be invalid and illegal by this Court in M/S Pramur Homes And

¶80

Shelters’s case referred to Supra.

¶81

Under these circumstances, the impugned show cause notice dated 30.06.2022 at Annexure-B, Summary of Show Cause Notice dated 30.06.2022 at Annexure-B1 as well as Order-inOriginal dated 17.05.2024 at Annexure-E, Summary of Order dated 17.08.2024 at Annexure-E2 and Order-in-Appeal dated 06.02.2025 at Annexure-G deserve to be quashed.

¶82

In the result, I pass the following:

¶83

ORDER

¶84

(i) Petition is hereby allowed and disposed of in terms of

¶85

M/S Pramur Homes And Shelters Vs. The Union of India and Ors. in WP No.33081/2025 dated 11.12.2025.

¶86

(ii) The impugned show cause notice dated 30.06.2022 at Annexure-B, Summary of Show Cause Notice dated 30.06.2022 at Annexure-B1 as well as Order-in-Original dated 17.05.2024 at Annexure-E, Summary of Order dated 17.08.2024 at Annexure-E2 and Order-in-Appeal dated 06.02.2025 at Annexure-G and all

¶87

9 -

¶88

NC: 2025:KHC:54572 WP No. 34484 of 2025

¶89

HC-KAR

¶90

further proceedings, orders, notices etc., pursuant thereto initiated/to be initiated by the respondents are hereby quashed.

¶91

(iii) The respondents are however reserved liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law and if such proceedings are initiated by the respondents, petitioner would be entitled to contest / defend the same in accordance with law.

¶92

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶93

MDS

¶94

CT:HS

¶95

List No.: 3 Sl No.: 0

M/S Karnataka Power Corporation Limited v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Karnataka Power Corporation Limited v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aepl Infrastructure Private Limited Vs Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Priyanka Gandhi School of Nursing Vs Karnataka State Diploma in Nursing Examination Board

Huggi Revana Siddappa Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Educational Rating and Assessment Foundation, Vs Union of India

Smt Dhakashyanani Gangadharappa Vs the Superintendent of Central Tax

M/S Pavanaputra Resorts Vs Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax