M/S Udayshivakumar Vs Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

M/S UDAYSHIVAKUMAR A REGISTERED PARTNERHIP FIRM OFFICE AT NO.189/2 AND 3/2, PLOT NO.12, BASAVANAGAR, GOKAK, BELAGAVI - 591 307 (REP BY ITS PARTNER SRI. UDAYSHIVAKUMAR)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SMT. MONISHA SEN., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NAVEEN G.S .,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT, (AUDIT)-2, SUMOULYA SOUDHA, 3^RD FLOOR CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI - 590 001.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. SHARAD MAGADUM., AGA)

¶17

THIS REVIEW PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE (1) R/W SECTION 114 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT DATED 05TH AUGUST 2025, IN WRIT PETITION NO.105375/2025 (TAX RES) AND ETC.

¶18

THIS REVIEW PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC-D:293 RP No. 100090 of 2025

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

¶25

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs;

¶26

a. Review and set aside the order passed by this Hon’ble Court, dated 05^th August 2025, in Writ Petition No.105375/2025 (Tax Res);

¶27

b. Restore the WP No.105375/2025 (Tax Res) to the file and be pleased to hear the said writ petition on merits under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶28

c. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶29

This Court vide order dated 05.08.2025 in

¶30

WP No.105375 of 2025 taking into consideration his submission made then had dismissed the above said writ petition, reserving liberty to urge all contentions in appeal so filed by the petitioner. Subsequent thereto, the above review petition has been filed.

¶31

Notice has been ordered and respondent has entered appearance through his counsel.

¶32

3 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:293 RP No. 100090 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

The submission of Smt.Monisha Sen., learned counsel

¶35

for the petitioner is that apart from the appeal which has been filed, the one other point could not be addressed before this Court at that time. In that regard she submits that the notice which has been issued being for multiple assessment years is not maintainable and in that regard, she relies upon decision of Co-ordinate Bench of the Court in M/s Pramur Homes and Shelters vs., the Union of India & Ors., in WP No.33081 of 2025 dated

¶36

11.12.2025 more particularly para 8.27 thereof, which is reproduced hereunder for easy reference;

¶37

8.7 An even clearer expression of this intent is found in the insertion of Section 74A by the Finance Act, 2024 (dated 16.08.2024), effective from 01.11.2024, which begins with the words "pertaining to the financial year 2024-25 onwards". The Legislature has expressly tied the determination of tax not paid or short paid to a single financial year, confirming that GST assessments are intrinsically financial-year-specific. The introduction of Section 74A does not change the earlier law; it clarifies the legislative scheme which already existed.

¶38

Her submission is that when a Co-ordinate Bench of

¶39

this Court as held that consolidated show-cause notice

¶40

4 -

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC-D:293 RP No. 100090 of 2025

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

under Section 73/74 of the CGST Act is illegal and impermissible in law, the further proceedings could not be continued.

¶44

In that view of the matter, she submits that in the present case the show-notice dated 16.05.2024 had been issued for 5 assessment years viz., 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 and the order passed in Sub-section (9) of Section 73 were for four assessment years viz., 2020-21, 2021-22, 202223 and 2023-24 and as such she submits that the show-cause notice having been issued for 5 years subsequent order under Sub-section (9) of Section 73 having been passed for four years is not permissible by relying upon the decision in in M/s Pramur Homes and Shelters’s case rendered by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. She therefore submits that the above Review Petition would be required to be allowed, the writ petition restore to file as also the

¶45

5 - NC: 2026:KHC-D:293 RP No. 100090 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

relief sought for in the said writ petition are required to be granted.

¶48

Sri.Sharad Magadum., learned AGA appearing for the respondent-State would however seek to rely upon judgements of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court and Delhi High Court to contended that those two Hon’ble Courts have held differently than the Single Judge of this Court and those two Hon’ble Courts have held that so long has no prejudice is caused to the petitioner, a common/consolidated notice issued cannot be quashed on that ground and as such he submits that the Review Petition is required to be dismissed.

¶49

Though learned AGA relies upon the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court and Hon’ble Delhi High Court, I am of the considered opinion that since the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in M/s Pramur Homes and Shelters’ case has categorically come to a conclusion that a consolidated show-cause notice could not have been issued and any proceedings and

¶50