M/S Oceanus Transports Private Limited Vs Union of India

M/S. OCEANUS TRANSPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, 1^ST FLOOR, K NO 401/3, DR RAJKUMAR ROAD, BEML TOWNSHIP G M PALYA, NEW THIPPASANDRA, BENGALURU URBAN, KARNATAKA-580075 (REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI. SHRADDHA B.)

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. ATUL KRISHNA RAO ALUR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, (REVENUE) MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 001.

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:22002 WP No. 10839 of 2026

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

¶19

(AUDIT)-5.10., DGSTO-5, 4^TH FLOOR, A-BLOCK, VTK-2, R.NO. 401, RAJENDRANAGARA, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560047.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. K. HEMA KUMAR, AGA)

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ADJUDICATION ORDER PASSED U/S.73(9) OF THE CGST/KGST ACT, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2021-22, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 DATED 30/12/2025 AT ANNEXURE-K, BEARING NO. DCCT(AUDIT 5.10)/DGSTO-5/ADJ/2025-26, IN SO FOR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED AND ETC.,

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

¶25

ORAL ORDER

¶26

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts

¶27

notice for the respondents No.2 and 3. Learned counsel, Sri. Madanan Pillai is directed to accept notice for respondent No.1.

¶28

The petitioner has called in question the validity of the order of adjudication passed under Section 73(9) of the KGST/CGST Act. It is contended that the order passed

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:22002 WP No. 10839 of 2026

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

is an exparte order and the authority has completed the adjudication and raised a demand in light of absence of any stand by the petitioner on the basis of material available with the authority.

¶32

It is submitted that the issues raised are densely factual and if an opportunity is granted to the petitioner to participate in the proceedings, the petitioner would take stand regarding the discrepancies. It is submitted that petitioner may be put on terms and the matter be relegated to the authority by re-opening the proceedings.

¶33

Learned AGA submits that the petitioner not having participated in the proceedings has to bear the consequences of the order.

¶34

Perused the impugned order at Annexure-K. It is noticed that the premise on which the order is passed relates to several issues including short payment of GST due to reverse charge, wrong availment and utilisation of

¶35

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:22002 WP No. 10839 of 2026

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

excess ITC and certain other issues. It is also noticed that the aspect relates to discrepancies as regards ITC claim in GSTR-3B vis-à-vis ITC available to be claimed in terms of GSTR-2A. The issues raised are densely factual and for proper adjudication, it would be appropriate that the authority is to decide on the basis of written reply to the show-cause notice.

¶38

In light of the assertion of the petitioner that there are materials to demonstrate the discrepancies do not exist and also they would demonstrate and reconcile the alleged discrepancy between GSTR-3B versus GSTR2A, the impugned order at Annexure-K is set aside. The matter is remitted for fresh consideration to the stage of reply to show-cause notice. The petitioner is put on terms and is required to deposit 10% of the demand by the date of hearing fixed.

¶39