The Stems N Leaves International Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

The Stems N Leaves International Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Order-in-Original at Annexure-A set aside and matter remitted to the respondent authority for fresh consideration; petitioner permitted to file additional reply to the show-cause notice and produce further documents; directed to appear before the respondent without further notice on 11.05.2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Order-in-Original is legally tenable in fastening liability on the petitioner, who is the supplier, for violation of clauses (iii), (v) and (ix) of Notification No.41/2017 Integrated Tax (Rate), when those clauses fasten liability on the recipient and not the supplier. +1 more

Court's answer

The adjudicating authority may, if found necessary, call upon the recipient in course of the proceedings for getting further documents that may throw light on the adjudication.

Ratio / Principle

Taking note of the petitioner's contentions, though the petitioner had made out a reply and participated in the proceedings, it would be appropriate to remit the matter back to the authority for reconsideration and a re-look, particularly in light of the submission that documents are available to demonstrate that clauses (iii), (v) and (ix) of Notification No.41/2017 are fulfilled.

Key takeaways

The petition is disposed of by setting aside the order at Annexure-A and remitting the matter for fresh consideration in terms of the observations made above.ratio¶42
The petitioner is entitled to make out an additional reply to the show-cause notice and produce other documents in his possession that may assist the authority in adjudicating the matter, and to appear before the respondent without further notice on 11.05.2026.ratio¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (S Sunil Dutt Yadav, J.), disposing of W.P. No. 5445 of 2026 (T-RES) filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by an exporter/supplier against an Order-in-Original (OIO SI.NO.MLR-GST-000-KUL-SUP-YS-16-2024-25 dated 31.07.2024) passed by the Superintendent of Central Tax (GST), Kulur Range, which fastened liability on the petitioner-supplier for violation of clauses (iii), (v) and (ix) of Notification No.41/2017 Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 23.10.2017 — clauses which, per the petitioner, fasten liability on the recipient and not the supplier. Noting the petitioner had replied to the show-cause notice (Annexure-R) and participated in the proceedings, the Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh reconsideration, directing the authority to re-look at the matter in light of submitted shipping bills and other documents said to demonstrate fulfilment of the cited clauses, permitting the authority to call upon the recipient if necessary, and permitting the petitioner to file an additional reply and produce further documents, with appearance fixed for 11.05.2026.

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:18755 WP No. 5445 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

WRIT PETITION NO. 5445 OF 2026 (T-RES)

BETWEEN:

THE STEMS N LEAVES INTERNATIONAL, REG OFF: SALVADORE VILLA, URWA-CHILIMBI, MANGALORE-575006, REPRESENTED BY THE PROPRIETOR, MR. JUDE JERALD GOVEAS, S/O MR. VICTOR GOVEAS, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO.2-14-1203/5, 4^TH CROSS ROAD ANEGUNDI, NEAR SBI BANK, KAPIKAD, MANGALORE-575004.

…PETITIONER

Digitally signed by MAMATHA R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

(BY SRI. AJAY PRABHU M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX (GST) THE OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX, KULUR RANGE, 5^TH FLOOR, PUNJA BUILDING ANNEXE, LAL BAUGH, MANGALURU-575003.

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. AKASH B. SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER IN ORIGINAL BEARING OIO SI.NO.MLR-

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:18755 WP No. 5445 of 2026

HC-KAR

GST-000-KUL-SUP-YS-16-2024-25 DATED 31.07.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND ALL FURTHER ACTIONS THERETO ANNEXURE-A.

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 sought for setting aside of the Order-in-Original at Annexure-A dated 31.07.2024.

It is the contention of the learned counsel Sri. Ajay Prabhu M., appearing for the petitioner that the impugned order fastening liability on the petitioner who is the supplier, is not legally tenable. It is the contention that the Order-in-Original is on the premise that there has been a violation of clause - (iii), (v) and (ix) vide Notification No.41/2017 Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 23.10.2017 at Annexure-P, which clauses fasten liability on the recipient and not the supplier.

It is submitted that the answering party to such violation is the recipient and not the supplier and on such

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:18755 WP No. 5445 of 2026

HC-KAR

sole ground, the authority ought to have dropped proceedings against the petitioner. It is further submitted that in response to show-cause notice, reply at Annexure-R has been placed on record which has not been taken note of appropriately.

Petitioner has also filed a memo along with documents which consists of shipping bills and submits that even otherwise the documents of the recipients have also been placed on record.

Sri. Akash B. Shetty, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that default of the relevant clauses of the notification relates to furnishing of documents which may eventually lead to liability of the supplier. However, counsel for the petitioner would dispute such contention.

Perused the order at Annexure-A. There is a

reference relating to the violation of clause (iii), (v) and (ix) vide Notification No.41/2017.

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:18755 WP No. 5445 of 2026

HC-KAR

Learned counsel for the petitioner further

submits that the authority has not looked into the documents of record in a proper perspective and if the matter is remitted, the petitioner would also demonstrate that documents in terms of the notification are available.

Reliance is also placed on the documents placed along with the memo.

Taking note of such contention, though it is noticed that the petitioner has made out reply and participated in the proceedings, it would be appropriate to remit the matter back for reconsideration, directing the authority to re-look into the matter, particularly in light of the submission of the counsel for the petitioner, that documents are available to demonstrate that clauses (iii), (v) and (ix) of Notification No.41/2017 are fulfilled.

Further, the authority may call upon the recipient in course of these proceedings if found necessary for getting further documents that may throw light on the

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:18755 WP No. 5445 of 2026

HC-KAR

adjudication. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of, setting aside the order at Annexure-A and remitting the matter for fresh consideration, in terms of the observations made above.

Petitioner is entitled to make out additional reply to the show-cause notice and produce other documents in his possession that may assist the authority in adjudicating the matter. Petitioner to appear before the respondent without further notice on 11.05.2026.

Accordingly, petition is disposed of .

SD/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

MCR