M/S BAGMANE DEVELOPERS PVT LTD LAKE VIEW "A" BLOCK 8^TH FLOOR, BHAGAMANE TECH PARK, C V RAMAN NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 093 (REP. BY MR RAJA BAGMANE, MANAGING DIRECTOR S/O MR B C CHANDRE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS)

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA C R.,ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU -560 001

¶13

CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001

¶14

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:24903 WP No. 9430 of 2020

¶15

HC-KAR

¶16

REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN

¶17

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX GST EAST COMMISSIONERATE, 4^TH FLOOR, BMTC/TTMC BUILDING, OLD AIRPORT ROAD, DOMLUR, BENGALURU-560 071

¶18

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX GST EAST COMMISSIONERATE, 4^TH FLOOR, BMTC/TTMC BUILDING, OLD AIRPORT ROAD, DOMLUR, BENGALURU-560 071

¶19

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.AMIT DESHPANDE .,ADVOCATE FOR R-3 TO R-5; (MA FIELD FOR R-4 & R-5 ONLY) SRI.B.S.VENKATANARAYANA., ASG FOR R-1; SMT.JYOTHI MARADI., AGA FOR R-2)

¶20

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTION DECLARING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 17(5)(C) AND (D) OF CGST ACT, VIDE ANNX-A AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE GROUNDS ETC.,

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶23

¶24

NC: 2025:KHC:24903 WP No. 9430 of 2020

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the

¶28

following reliefs;

¶29

a) Issue a writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the provisions of section 17(5)(c) & (d) of CGST Act, enclosed as Annexure A as unconstitutional for the reasons stated in the grounds.

¶30

b) In the alternative, this Court may to "read the said wordings contained in Section 17(5)© & (d) of CGST Act, enclosed as Annexure A so as to allow use of input tax register tax credit on goods and services used in construction in business to business cases (B2B cases) and deny input tax credit only in cases of businessto-consumer ("B2C" cases) which leads to termination of tax chain;

¶31

c) Issue a writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the provisions of section 16(4) of CGST Act, enclosed as Annexure B as unconstitutional for the reasons stated in the grounds;

¶32

d) In the alternative, this Court may to "read down" the said wordings contained in Section 16(4) of CGST Act, enclosed as Annexure B so as to interpret the time limit for taking input tax credit as procedural and directory in nature

¶33

¶34

NC: 2025:KHC:24903 WP No. 9430 of 2020

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

e) Issue a writ of declaration or certiorari any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the provisions of Rule 61(5) of CGST Rules, enclosed as AnnexureC as unconstitutional for the reasons stated in the grounds,

¶37

f) Issue a writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the provisions of section 50 of CGST Act, enclosed as Annexure D, as being unenforceable as the machinery provisions are not prescribed;

¶38

g) Issue a writ of declaration or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the provisions of section 164(3) of CGST Act, enclosed as Annexure E, as unconstitutional for the reasons stated in the grounds;

¶39

h) Issue a writ or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari or any other writ or direction to quash impugned show cause notice bearing C. No. IV/16/145/2019-20 AEDS 1064/2020. dated 06.03.2020, enclosed as Annexure F issued by the Respondent No. 4, for the reasons stated in the grounds;

¶40

And

¶41

i) Grant such other consequential reliefs as this Honbl'e High Court may think it refund of amounts paid, if any and the cost writ petition.

¶42

¶43

NC: 2025:KHC:24903 WP No. 9430 of 2020

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

A memo dated 17.6.2025 signed by learned counsel

¶46

for petitioner has been filed, which reads as under:

¶47

"The advocate for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.9430/2020 (T-TAR) humbly prays this Hon'ble Court to allow us to withdraw the above matter as not pressed."

¶48

Accepting the said memo and submission of learned

¶49

counsel for the petitioner, the petition is dismissed

¶50

as withdrawn.

¶51

SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶52

GSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

M/S Bagmane Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M/S Bagmane Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sourav Sekhar Behera Vs the State of Karnataka

Uliyaragoli Milk Producers Cooperative Society Ltd. Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Lakshmi Bai (Dead) Vs Jagadish H.S. Since Dead by

Shri Bangalore Cheluva Narayan Vs the Assessment Unit

Mr.Muyeen Pasha Vs the Income-Tax Officer

Smt. Usha Sandeep Vs the Assesment Unit