M/S. KALEBUDDE LOGISTICS vs. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

WRIT PETITION NO.112365/2019 (T-IT)

BETWEEN:

M/S. KALEBUDDE LOGISTICS NO.75/2B, KALEBUDDE WAREHOUSE COMPOUND, GABBUR HUBBALLI-580028, DIST: DHARWAD, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SRI.PARVEEZ AHEMAD S/O FAZAL KALEBUDDE, AGED: 29 YEARS. ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. H R KAMBIYAVAR, ADV. FOR SRI. SHRIHARSH A. NEELOPANT, ADV.)

AND

REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

TO GOVT. DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE

DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 01 …RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. V. S. KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE FIRST APPEAL ORDER BEARING No.AP/GST-05/2019-20, DATED 29.07.2019 FOR THE MONTH MAY 2019 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-B IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED; AND ETC.,

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER

Petitioner aggrieved by the order bearing No.AP/GST-05/2019-20, dated 29.07.2019 for the assessment year for the month of May-2019 passed by the second respondent vide Annexure-B and also sought for mandamus directing the second respondent for giving an opportunity of hearing of the petitioner, hence, filed this writ petition.

3 2. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner is that petitioner who is an assessee has assailed D-mat Act Annexure-A whereby, assessee has been called upon the petitioner to pay Rs.57,75,000/- with respect to the financial year 2019. The petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 20.05.2019 vide Annexure-A filed appeal before the second respondent under Section 107(11) of the Karnataka GST Act, 2017. The second respondent dismissed the first appeal without mentioning any further notice to the petitioner though requested. The requests of the petitioner was ignored and hence there was clear cut violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the second respondent as per Annexure-B. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned HCGP. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the second respondent without hearing the petitioner and without providing an opportunity has passed the impugned

4 order which is in contravention of principles of natural justice. The Assessment period is May-2019. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that no opportunity was given to the petitioner and without hearing the petitioner has passed the impugned order. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the order passed in W.P. No.110318/2019 disposed of on 09.09.2019 in the case of KLE Society Hospital And Medial Research Centre, V/s. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and another. 7. From the perusal of the Annexure-B, the second respondent without providing an opportunity to the petitioner has passed the impugned order. Thus, impugned order passed by the second respondent is in contravention of principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned orders deserves to be set aside only on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed, the impugned order

5 is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to the second respondent to reconsider the appeal afresh after hearing the parties and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. The contentions of the parties are kept open. In view of the disposal of writ petition, pending consideration of I.A. does not survive for consideration.

Sd/- JUDGE MNS/