Shree Marulasiddeshwara Traders Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Shree Marulasiddeshwara Traders Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Setting aside of the ex-parte Orders in Original at Annexures-D and E and remission of the matter to respondent No.2 to the stage of reply to the show-cause notices, with directions to the petitioner to file a reply and appear on 02.02.2026 at 11.30 a.m.; indulgence to stand withdrawn on non-appearance; all contentions kept open.

Issue for consideration

Whether the show-cause notices dated 27.11.2024 and 29.11.2024 issued by respondent No.2 (Annexures-A and B) are barred by limitation and liable to be quashed by a writ in the nature of certiorari. +1 more

Court's answer

All contentions are kept open; the merits, including the plea that the show-cause notices are barred by limitation, were not adjudicated.

Ratio / Principle

The lapse of the petitioner in not replying to the show-cause notice was accepted as bona-fide.

Key takeaways

The Orders in Original at Annexures-D and E are set aside and the matter is remitted back to respondent No.2 to the stage of reply to the show-cause notices.ratio¶¶40
The petitioner is directed to make out a reply to the show-cause notices at Annexures-A and B and to appear before the authority on 02.02.2026 at 11.30 a.m.ratio¶¶41
In the event of the petitioner not appearing before the authority, the indulgence granted by the Court would stand withdrawn.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru (S Sunil Dutt Yadav J) — W.P. No. 254 of 2026 (T-RES), SHREE MARULASIDDESHWARA TRADERS (proprietary concern) v. State of Karnataka & Asst. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, LGSTO-230, Sagar. Filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking certiorari to quash two show-cause notices dated 27.11.2024 and 29.11.2024 (Annexures-A and B) as barred by limitation; the petitioner's non-reply had culminated in ex-parte Orders in Original (Annexures-D and E) raising demand. Accepting the lapse as bona-fide and noting the orders were admittedly ex-parte, the Court set aside the Orders in Original, remitted the matter to respondent No.2 to the stage of reply to the show-cause notices, directed the petitioner to file its reply and appear on 02.02.2026 at 11.30 a.m. (failing which the Court's indulgence would stand withdrawn), and disposed of the petition keeping all contentions open. The limitation plea itself was not adjudicated on merits.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:2945 WP No. 254 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

WRIT PETITION NO. 254 OF 2026 (T-RES)

BETWEEN:

SHREE MARULASIDDESHWARA TRADERS, (PROPRIETORY CONCERN) 917/602, ISURU, SHIKARIPURA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DIST - 577 427, BY ITS PROPRIETOR MARI SHIVAPPALLI SATHISH, AGED 54 YEARS.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. MAHESH R UPPIN,ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by VIDYA G R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKAS SOUDHA, M.S.BUILDING, BENGALURU - 560 001.

ASST. COMMISSIONERE OF COMMERECIAL TAXES, LGSTO - 230, KAGODU THIMMAPPA EXTENSION, SAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 401.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. JYOTHI M. MARADI, HCGP)

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:2945 WP No. 254 of 2026

HC-KAR

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE BEARING NO. AACT.LGSTO.-230/SGR/SCN/ 228/2024-25 (T.NO.1458) DATED 27.11.2024 AND SHOW CAUSE NOTICE BEARING NO.AACT.LGSTO.-230/SGR/DRC01/262/2024-25 (T. NO.1470) DATED 29.11.2024 ISSUED BY THE R2 MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ANNEXURE-B RESPECTIVELY HOLDING THE SAME AS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND ETC.,

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

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

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has challenged the show-cause notices

at Annexures-A and B as well as the Order in Original at Annexures-D and E. It is the case of the petitioner that insofar as the case of the petitioner was taken up for scrutiny and show-cause notice was issued. However, due to bona-fide lapse on part of the petitioner, there was no reply to the show-cause notice which eventually has culminated in the order in original, and raising of demand.

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:2945 WP No. 254 of 2026

HC-KAR

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

taking note of the bona-fide lapse of the petitioner, matter may be re-opened and appropriate orders be passed.

Learned High Court Government Pleader

submits that the notices have been issued and it is the lapse of the petitioner for not having availed of the opportunity. However, it is submitted that orders passed

are ex-parte orders and the Court may pass appropriate orders.

Taking note that the orders at Annexures-D and E are admittedly ex-parte orders passed without any reply on part of the petitioner, it would be appropriate to remit the matter back to the stage of reply to the show-cause notice which would meet the ends of justice. It would also enable the authority to adjudicate on the merits of the matter.

Accepting the lapse on part of the petitioner to be bona-fide, it would be appropriate to set aside the

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:2945 WP No. 254 of 2026

HC-KAR

orders at Annexures-D and E and remit the matter back to respondent No.2 to the stage of reply to the show-cause notices.

The petitioner to make out reply to the showcause notice at Annexures-A and B. The petitioner to appear on 02.02.2026 at 11.30 a.m. Needless to state, in the event of petitioner not appearing before the authority,

the indulgence granted by this Court would stand withdrawn.

Accordingly, petition is disposed of . All

contentions are kept open.

Sd/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

MCR