M/S Bowring Service Station Vs the Commercial Tax Officer (ENFORCEMENT-56)

M/S BOWRING SERVICE STATION, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM CREATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE PARTNERSHIP ACT 1932 HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 37/2, BOWRING INSTITUTE OF COMPOUND, ST MARKS ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY/PARTNER MR. GOVIND VENKATACHALAM. (BY SRI. SANDEEP HUILGOL.,ADVOCATE) AND:

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (ENFORCEMENT-56) SOUTH ZONE, BANGALORE, ROOM NO. 601, 6TH FLOOR, VTK BUILDING-II, KORAMANGALA. BANGALORE-560047.

¶13

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ENFORCEMENT-27), SOUTH ZONE, BANGALORE, ROOM NO. 601, 6TH FLOOR, VTK BUILDING-II, KORAMANGALA. BANGALORE-560047.

¶14

THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ENFORCEMENT), SOUTH ZONE, BANGALORE, ROOM NO. 601, 6TH FLOOR, VTK BUILDING-II, KORAMANGALA. BANGALORE-560047.

¶15

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:44030 WP No. 9447 of 2024

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, STATE OF KARNATAKA, 1ST FLOOR, VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA, KALIDASA MARG, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560009.

¶18

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED HEREIN BY THE PRINCIPAL SECERTARY-FINANCE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI K HEMA KUMAR, AGA)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 30.12.2023 BEARING NO. ADCOM/ENF/SZ/CTO(ENF56)/ADJN-07/2023-24 AND RFN ZD291223101806K AND ZD291223101840S PASSED BY THE R-1 UNDER SECTION 73 OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 AND THE KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 AND THE INTEGRATED GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT, 2017 FOR THE TAX PERIODS JULY 2017 TO MARCH 2019 TOGETHER WITH THE ANNEXED COMPUTATION SHEET (ANNX-A1) AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks the following

¶26

reliefs:

¶27

“1) Quashing the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 bearing No. ADCOM/ENF/SZ/CTO(Enf-56)/ADJN-07/202324 and RFN ZD291223101806K and ZD291223101840S passed by the 1st Respondent under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:44030 WP No. 9447 of 2024

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for the tax periods July 2017 to March 2019 together with the annexed computation sheet (Annexure A-1);

¶32

(II) Quashing the impugned summary of the demand dated 30.12.2023 bearing T.M. 254/23-24 and No. ADCOM/ENF/SZ/CTO(Enf-56)/ADJN-07/2023-24 and RFN ZD291223101806K and ZD291223101840S issued by the 1st Respondent in Form GST DRC-07 under Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the tax periods July 2017 to March 2019 (Annexure A-2);

¶33

(iii) Declaring that the denial of Input Tax Credit to the Petitioner solely on the basis of a mere mismatch between the details of Input Tax Credit available in its Form GSTR2A and its Form GSTR-3B, is unconstitutional, arbitrary and ultra vires the scheme and object of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017;

¶34

(iv) Pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interests of justice and equity.”

¶35

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶36

the learned AGA for respondents and perused the material on record.

¶37

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:44030 WP No. 9447 of 2024

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner filed its Return of Turnovers for tax periods July 2017 to March 2019. The Respondent initiated proceedings u/s. 73 of the Act CGST/KGST Act, 2017 and issued intimation notice to the Petitioner to file reply. Subsequently, the first respondent issued show-cause notice in Form GST DRC-01A as per Section 73(5)/74(5) of KGST Act, calling for explanation with regard to the amount of tax/interest/penalty payable. The Petitioner filed its reply dated 06.12.2023 to the aforesaid showcause notice. Pursuant to the same, the respondent without considering the reply filed by the Petitioner and not providing the petitioner a sufficient opportunity of personal hearing u/s. 75(4) of the act proceeded to pass the impugned orders at Annexures-A1 and A2, both dated 30.12.2023, which are assailed in the present petition.

¶40

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶41

the petitioner had filed its reply to the show-cause notice dated 30.09.2023 and the respondent without considering

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:44030 WP No. 9447 of 2024

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

the said reply and without granting an opportunity of personal hearing has passed the impugned order at Annexures-A1 and A2 dated 30.12.2023 and the impugned orders deserve to be quashed and the matter be 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.

¶45

Per contra, learned AGA for respondents would support the impugned orders and submit 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.

¶46

A perusal of the material on record including the impugned orders will indicate that it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner filed its Reply to the show-cause notice and the impugned orders have been passed without

¶47

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:44030 WP No. 9447 of 2024

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

granting an opportunity to the petitioner to produce necessary documents. Under these circumstances, in view of the respondent failing to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner 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 orders and remit the matter back to the respondents for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law by issuing certain directions.

¶50

In the result, I pass the following:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

i) The Writ Petition is allowed ;

¶53

ii) The impugned orders passed by the

¶54

first respondent at Annexures-A1 and A2, both dated 30.12.2023 are hereby set aside;

¶55

iv) The petitioner shall appear before the

¶56

first respondent on 01.12.2025, on which date,

¶57

7 -

¶58

NC: 2025:KHC:44030 WP No. 9447 of 2024

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

he shall submit his reply to the show cause notice along with relevant documents.

¶61

v) Upon the petitioner submitting a reply along with relevant documents to the show cause notice, on 01.12.2025, the first respondent shall afford a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear him and proceed further in accordance with law.

¶62

(vi) In the event, the Petitioner does not appear before the 1^st respondent on 01.12.2025 as stated supra, the present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders.

¶63

Sd/(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

¶64

CM

M/S Bowring Service Station v. the Commercial Tax Officer (ENFORCEMENT-56)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Bowring Service Station v. the Commercial Tax Officer (ENFORCEMENT-56)

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 Manidhari Trading Company Vs State of Karnataka

M/S M K Agrotech Private Limited Vs Union of India

Motorla Mobility India Priate Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Smt. Manjula Vs the Commissioner

Sri Arun Kumar Mahapatra Vs Karnataka State Open University

Sri.Abdul Razak Vs the State of Karnataka