Case Law Details
Blackfish Technologies Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Karnataka High Court)
The Karnataka High Court allowed a writ petition challenging an Order-in-Original dated 15.12.2025 and the consequential DRC-07 issued under Section 73(9) of the CGST/KGST Acts. The petitioner contended that after receiving a DRC-01 show cause notice on 10.06.2025, it had submitted a detailed reply by email on 02.07.2025 and uploaded the relevant details on the GST portal on 02.08.2025. The petitioner further asserted that the reply was accompanied by 14 supporting documents.
Despite this, the adjudicating authority recorded in the impugned order that the taxpayer had neither filed any reply to the DRC-01 notice nor discharged the applicable liability along with interest and penalty. The petitioner argued that the order had been passed without considering the response and supporting material already submitted.
Upon examining the record, the High Court found that the petitioner had indeed furnished a detailed reply supported by 14 documents. The acknowledgment generated through the GST portal and the email printouts evidencing submission of the reply had also been placed before the Court.
The Court observed that the authority’s statement that no reply had been received was contrary to the record and amounted to a violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Court quashed both the Order-in-Original and the DRC-07. The matter was remitted to the adjudicating authority for fresh consideration, with directions to consider the petitioner’s reply and documents and provide an opportunity of personal hearing before passing a fresh order.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs;
a. this Hon’ble Court be pleased to Issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the Order-in-Original No. ACCT/LGSTO-45/Adj/T.3647/2025-26 dated 15.12.2025 (Impugned Order) and the DRC-07 Reference No. ZD2912252192299 dated 29.12.2025 (DRC-07′) passed by the Respondent No. 1 under Section 73(9) of the CGST Act, 2017/ KGST Act, 2017 (Annexure-A and Annexure-B).
b. this Hon’ble Court be pleased to Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction remanding the matter to the Respondent No.1 for fresh adjudication after affording the Petitioner a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing, and after duly considering the replies and documents already submitted by the Petitioner.
c. For such further and other reliefs, as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case.
2. The petitioner is challenging the Order-in-Original bearing No.ACCT/LGSTO-45/Adj/T.3647/2025-26 dated 15.12.2025 and DRC-07 Reference No.ZD2912252192299 dated 29.12.2025 passed by respondent No.1 under Section 739 of the CGST Act, 2017/KGST Act, 2017 produced at Annexure-A and B.
3. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a show-cause notice in terms of DRC-01 having been received on 10.06.2025 was replied to by the petitioner on 02.07.2025 by email as also the details thereof had been uploaded onto the portal of the respondents on 02.08.2025. Despite which respondent No.1 in the impugned order stated that, “in response to DRC-01 dated 10.06.2025, notice the Tax Payer has not filed any reply nor discharged the applicable liability along with the interest and penalty”.
4. His submission therefore is that a detailed reply with about 14 annexures have not been considered by respondent No.1, resulting in the impugned order being passed without consideration of the reply of the petitioner.
5. A perusal of the documents indeed indicates that there is a detailed reply which has been submitted by the petitioner accompanied by 14 documents which have also been placed on record as Annexure J1 to the present petition. The acknowledgment on the portal has also been placed on record, so also the email printout has been placed on record.
6. Despite which respondent No.1 has stated that there is no reply received, which is contrary to the records. The same violates the principle of natural justice. As such, this Court pass the following;
ORDER
i. The writ petition is allowed.
ii. A certiorari is issued, the Order-in-Original bearing No.ACCT/LGSTO-45/Adj/T.3647/2025-26 dated 15.12.2025 (Impugned Order) and the DRC-07 Reference No.ZD2912252192299 dated 29.12.2025 (DRC-07′) passed by Respondent No.1 at Annexure-A and Annexure-B are hereby quashed.
iii. The matter is remitted to respondent No.1 for fresh consideration. Respondent No.1 shall consider the reply along with all the documents which have been furnished by the petitioner as also offered an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
iv. Since the order is passed in the presence of both the counsels, the petitioner shall appear before respondent No.1 without requirement of any further notice on 00 a.m. on 17.06.2026. Respondent No.1 shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass necessary orders.
Author Bio
