VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Karnataka High Court 2026 › High Court of Karnataka

M/S Gs E-Commerce Private Limited v. Superintendent of Central Tax.,

DISPOSED
Court
High Court of Karnataka
Decided
3 February 2026
Bench
S Sunil Dutt Yadavauthor
Case no.
WP 867/2026

Follow Karnataka High CourtFollow S Sunil Dutt Yadav

Judgment

e -e1e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:6105 WP(No.(867(of(2026 IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU( RDDATED(THIS(THE(3 (DAY(OF(FEBRUARY,(2026( BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(S(SUNIL(DUTT(YADAV( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(867(OF(2026((T-RES) BETWEEN:( M/S,GS,E-COMMERCE,PRIVATE,LIMITED, A,PRIVATE,LIMITED,COMPANY,, INCORPORATED,UNDER,THE,PROVISIONS,, OF,THE,COMPANIES,ACT, REPRESENTED,BY,ITS,AGM,TAXATION, SMT.,SNEHA,BIYALA, WIFE,OF,NITIN,BIYALA, AGED,ABOUT,38,YEARS, KATHA,NEW,NO.,5,-,OLD,NO.,25, 14TH,CROSS,,3RD,BLOCK, NEXT,TO,RAMA,KRISHNA,HOSPITAL, JAYANAGAR,,, BENGALURU,URBAN-560,011., …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,JOSEPH,VARGHESE,,ADVOCATE,FOR,Digitally signedtiby ,,,,,,SRI.,LAKSHMI,MENON.,,ADVOCATE), VIJAYA0P Location: AND: HIGH0COURT OF KARNATAKA 1., SUPERINTENDENT,OF,CENTRAL,TAX, RANGE,BSD-3,,DIVISION-03, OFFICE,OF,THE,ASSISTANT,COMMISSIONER,, DIVISION-03,,BENGALURU,SOUTH, COMMISSIONERATE,,BENGALURE, BMTC,TTMC,,BANASHANKARI, BENGALURU,-,560,070.,

2., JOINT,COMMISSIONER, /,ADDITIONAL,COMMISSIONER,OF,, CENTRAL,TAX,(APPEALS-1), e -e2e-eeeee e e NC:(2026:KHC:6105 WP(No.(867(of(2026 TTMC,,BMTC,BUILDING,,DOMLUR, BENGALURU-560,071., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,ARAVIND,V,CHAVAN.,,ADVOCATE), , THIS, WP, IS, FILED, UNDER, ARTICLES, 226, AND, 227, OF, THE,CONSTITUTION,OF,INDIA,PRAYING,TO,QUASH,THE,SHOW, CAUSE, NOTICE, UNDER, SECTION, 73(1), OF, THE, ACT, DTD,

10.02.2023, VIDE, SCN, NO., 16/GST/2022-23/SD-3/SUPERINTENDENT, BEARING, DIN, NO., 20230257YV0000498, 4F5, ISSUED, BY, THE, RESPONDENT, NO.1, AND, REFERRED, AS, ANNEXURE-A1.,, , 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 , Petitioner, has, sought, for, setting, aside, of, the, show, cause, notice, at, Annexure-A1;, order-in-original, at, Annexure-A2;,summary,order,at,Annexure-A3;, summary, order, at, Annexure-A4., Petitioner, has, also, sought, for, remanding, of, the, matter, to, the, stage, of, show, cause, notice.,,

¶2It, is, to, be, noticed, that, an, order-in-original, came, to, be, passed,at,Annexure-A2, and, as, against, such, order,an,appeal,was,filed,before,the,appellate,authority.,It,

is made out from the facts that appeal filed was stated to be a belated appeal and hence has been rejected as per the order at Annexure-A4.

¶3It is the case of the petitioner that during the process of hearing of the appeal, notice of personal hearing was issued on 30.10.2025 fixing the date as

31.10.2025 at 12.05 p.m. Petitioner submits that in terms of Annexure-E5 an email was addressed to the authority seeking for an adjournment and such email was sent on

31.10.2025 at 11.53 a.m. which is earlier to the time of

12.05 p.m. fixed for personal hearing. It is submitted that however the order itself came to be passed on

31.10.2025.

¶4It is submitted that the court may permit the petitioner to make out his case before the appellate authority as he has enough grounds in support.

¶5Sri. Aravind V. Chavan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that he would leave it to the Court to pass appropriate orders.

¶6It becomes apparent from the facts as narrated above and also noticing that in response to the notice of personal hearing on 30.10.2025 fixing the personal hearing on 31.10.2025 at 12.05 p.m., request for adjournment was made out as per Annexure-E5, which was sent earlier to the time fixed for personal hearing. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to set aside the order at Annexure-A4 in Form-GST-APL-02 and remit the matter back to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. The appellate authority is to re-fix a fresh date for personal hearing and the matter to be proceeded with. Petitioner to appear before the appellate authority i.e. respondent no. without further notice on

23.02.2026. Needless to state, if the petitioner does not avail of such opportunity, he would be disentitled of the

indulgence granted by the Court. All contentions are kept open.

¶7Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP

Source: High Court of Karnataka, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.