M/S Activeiq Private Limited v. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

NC:(2026:KHC:4031( WP(No.(1908(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

RDDATED(THIS(THE(23 (DAY(OF(JANUARY,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(S(SUNIL(DUTT(YADAV( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(1908(OF(2026((T-RES)( BETWEEN:((

, M/S.,ACTIVEIQ,PRIVATE,LIMITED,, A,COMPANY,INCORPORATED,UNDER,THE, PROVISIONS,OF,THE,COMPANIES,ACT,, HAVING,ITS,REGISTERED,OFFICE,AT,

KNO1519/30/88,,115,,MULTI,DIAMOND,APARTMENT,, TH 6 ,,CROSS,,BALAJI,LAYOUT,,KODIGEHALLI,, BENGALURU,560092,, REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,, AUTHORISED,SIGNATORY/DIRECTOR,,

MR.,PRAFULL,GOYAL., …PETITIONER,

(BY,SRI.,ARUNACHALAM,SHIVAKUMAR.,ADVOCATE),

Digitallytisigned AND:( by0VIDYA0G0R Location:0HIGH , THE,ASSISTANT,COMMISSIONER,OF,COMMERCIAL,COURT0OF KARNATAKA TAXES,,LGSTO-152,, OFFICE,AT,NO.80/08,,SAMAYA,TOWERS,, TATA,NAGAR,MAIN,ROAD,, BENGALURU,-,560092., …RESPONDENT, (BY,SMT.,JYOTHI,M.,MARADI,,ADVOCATE), , THIS, WP, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA, PRAYING, TO, QUASH, THE, IMPUGNED, ORDER, DATED, 27.01.2025, BEARING, NO.,

ACCT(LGSTO-152)/DRC-07/2024-25/ORDER -U/S 73/2024-25 ISSUED IN FORM GST DRC-07 FOR THE TAX PERIOD 2020-21 PASSED BY RESPONDENT ANNEXED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE-A AND TO REMAND THE MATTER FOR RE-CONSIDERATION AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW THEREBY AFFORDING THE PETITIONER AN OPPORTUNITY TO ESTABLISH ITS BONAFIDES.

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

Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondent.

¶2The petitioner has called in question the correctness of the order dated 27.01.2025 at Annexure-A, which is the order of adjudication passed under Section 73(9) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax / Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

¶3It is the case of the petitioner that the order passed is an ex-parte order and adjudication has been

resorted to, in the absence of any reply by the petitioner. The petitioner submits that due to bona-fide reasons, they were not in a position to make out reply. It is submitted at the time of hearing of the matter that this aspect of reply to show cause notice was delegated to an outside tax professional, who failed in his duty to do so, and accordingly current order is passed.

¶4Learned HCGP appearing for the revenue, submits that the said assertion by the petitioner does not deserve acceptance, that notices were served and the order being passed without any reply on merits, is solely attributable to the petitioner. It is further submitted that apart from serving of notice, opportunities for personal hearing were also provided, which has not been taken benefit of, by the petitioner.

¶5Perused the order of adjudication at Annexure-A. It is apparent from the findings that the order

passed is in-effect an ex-parte order insofar as no reply was made to the show cause notice on its merits.

¶6No doubt, learned HCGP has pointed out that petitioner has not availed of the opportunity. However, by putting the petitioner to terms, it would be appropriate to afford another opportunity to the petitioner to make out reply to the show cause notice on merits. Such approach would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, the order at Annexure-A is set aside. Matter is remitted to the stage of reply to show cause notice. Petitioner to present himself before the respondent without further notice on

09.02.2026.

¶7Needless to state, if the petitioner fails to avail of the opportunity on the date fixed, the indulgence granted by this Court would stand withdrawn. Petitioner to pay cost of Rs.15,000 to the High Court Legal Services Committee.

¶8Accordingly, petition is disposed of. All contentions on merits are kept open.

Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

MCR