M/S Patel Metal Mart Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2026:KHC:1512 WP No. 257 of 2026

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

CERTIORARI FOR QUASHING THE EX-PARTE ORDER UNDER SECTION 73 OF THE GST ACT, DATED 07-08-2024, BEARING NO.CTO/LGSTO-11/DRC-07/2024-25, PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT, AS AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.,

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the ex-parte order passed under Section 73 of the GST Act dated 07.08.2024 at Annexure-A, as well as sought for setting aside of the notice to a third person under Section 79(1)(c) at Annexure-B.

¶26

It is the case of the petitioner that the order of adjudication at Annexure-A passed under Section 73 is an ex parte order. It is submitted that petitioner could not make out reply due to bona-fide reasons and accordingly, taking note that the tax has been recovered, the Court may take a lenient view in the matter, set aside the order and restore the matter to the stage of reply to show cause notice.

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2026:KHC:1512 WP No. 257 of 2026

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

Learned Additional Government Advocate

¶31

Sri. Hemakumar strenuously contends that notices have been served to the petitioner on the portal as well as by way of e-mail and the order cannot be described as an ex-

¶32

parte order passed in violation of principles of natural justice. Reference is made to the notices stated to have been sent under the column reference of the adjudicating order.

¶33

We are of the prima-facie view that the

¶34

submission of learned AGA requires acceptance. However, taking note that the order is passed without any reply on merits of the respondent, it would be appropriate despite lapse on the part of the petitioner to afford one more opportunity for the petitioner to participate in the proceedings on merits. Accordingly, the order at Annexure-A is set aside and matter is remitted to the stage of reply to show cause notice.

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:1512 WP No. 257 of 2026

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

5. Petitioner to appear before the respondent

¶39

along with reply to the show cause notice on 28.01.2026. In light of lapse on part of the petitioner, petitioner to pay cost of Rs.10,000/- to the High Court Legal Services Committee. All contentions are kept open.

¶40

Needless to state, in the event of failure of the petitioner to appear before the respondent on the date fixed, the indulgence extended would stand rescinded and

¶41

the impugned order would stand revived.

¶42

Accordingly, petition is disposed of .

¶43

Sd/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

¶44

MCR

M/S Patel Metal Mart v. the Commercial Tax Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Patel Metal Mart v. the Commercial Tax Officer

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

Smt Susheela Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Krishnappa Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S. Shree Mallikarjuna Enterprises, Vs State of Karnataka

G. T. Babu Reddy Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer

Sri a M Mayanna Vs Sri Mayiga @ Kuntegowda

SV3 Global Ventures Lp Vs Mr. Rakesh Vij