Anand Alluminium Works Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes & Others (Karnataka High Court)
Summary: The Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench, allowed the writ petition filed by M/s. Anand Alluminium Works against the dismissal of its appeal concerning a demand of ₹1,03,816 for FY 2017-18. The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Belagavi, had dismissed the appeal for non-appearance, while also stating that the grounds, available documents and departmental portal information disclosed no reason to interfere with the original order. The petitioner contended that the dismissal denied an opportunity of hearing and relied on Bondada Engineering Limited v. Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and others, W.P.No.26900 of 2024, decided on 20 March 2025, where a similar dismissal had been set aside to permit reconsideration.
The Court found that the impugned order lacked the points for determination, decisions thereon and reasons mandated by section 107(12) of the KGST Act, 2017. It emphasised that an appeal is a statutory remedy on both facts and law, and denial of that statutory right amounts to denial of a substantial right. Accordingly, the appellate order dated 31 March 2026 was set aside and the matter remanded for reasonable opportunity and a fresh decision strictly adhering to sections 107(11) and 107(12). The petitioner was directed to appear on 12 October 2026, and disposal was requested as expeditiously as possible within two months from the first appearance. All rival contentions were left open. Although the petition sought the benefit of Circular No.183/15/2022-GST, the Court did not adjudicate that entitlement.
Cases Discussed
- Bondada Engineering Limited v. Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and others, W.P.No.26900 of 2024, decided on 20 March 2025 (Karnataka High Court) — The petitioner relied on this decision setting aside an appellate dismissal for non-prosecution and remitting the matter for fresh consideration to provide another opportunity to prosecute the appeal on merits. The Court reproduced its reasoning and operative directions.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
With consent of both parties to the lis, matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. This writ petition is filed for the following reliefs:
“i) Issue Writ of Certiorari or in the like nature of Certiorari quashing an impugned order dated 31/03/2026, bearing No. in Appeal No.GST-533/2023-24 Arn No.AD290224046338z, for the tax period F.Y. 2017-18, passed by the Respondent No.2 vide Annexure-B.
(ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or a direction to give benefit under as per the Circular No.183/15/2022-GST, issued by the Respondent No.4, vide Annexure-D.
(iii) Pass such other Order or further Orders as this Hon’ble Court may deems fit in the facts and circumstances of this case, in the interest of justice and equity.”
3. On short point, heard Sri H.R.Kambiyavar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Smt.Nandini Somapur, learned AGA for respondents No.1 to 3 and Sri Girish Hulmani learned counsel for respondent No.4.
4. The lis involved in this matter is in a narrow compass. It is the case of the petitioner that the original authority passed an order demanding a sum of ₹1,03,816/-. This was the subject matter before the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Belagavi Division, Belagavi in Appeal No.GST-533/2023-24 under Section 107(11) of the KGST Act, 2017. The appellant failed to appear before the appellate authority to advance his arguments. Recording the same, the appellate authority dismissed the appeal for non-appearance. The order passed by the appellate authority reads as follows:
“Herein also, the Appellant has neither appeared nor has given any response to the opportunities given for being heard. In view of the above discussion, the Appeal becomes liable to be dismissed for non-appearance.
Further, inspite, of the non-appearance of the Appellant, the contentions in the Grounds of Appeal were perused. The contentions of the Appellant were verified with the documents available, the information available in the department portal etc. On verification of the said documents & information; and in the absence of evidence submitted by the Appellant, this office found no reason to interfere with the impugned order of the Respondent.
Hence, the Appeal stands Dismissed.”
5. Learned counsel Sri H.R.Kambiyavar, submits that dismissal for non-appearance amounts to denial of audi alteram partem. A principle enshrined under the doctrine of principles of natural justice. He further submits that this Court, in the catena of judgments set aside the order and remanded the matter by providing opportunity to the persons placed similarly that of the petitioner. One such identical matter considered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court is in W.P.No.26900 of 2024 disposed of on 20.03.2025 in the case of Bondada Engineering Limited v. Office of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and others. This Court allowed in the petition afore, set aside the order passed by the appellate authority and remanded the matter. The relevant paragraphs read as under:
“4. A perusal of the impugned order at Annexure-F dated 19.04.2023 will indicate that respondent No.2-Appellate Authority has proceeded to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. Though respondent No.2-Appellate Authority has assigned various other reasons for dismissing the appeal, having regard to the fact that the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution, it would be necessary to adopt a justice oriented approach and in order to provide one more opportunity to the appellant/petitioner to prosecute the appeal on merits, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order at Annexure-F dated 19.04.2023 and remit the matter back to the Appellate Authority for re-consideration afresh in accordance with law. 5. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ petition is allowed in part;
(ii) Order-in-appeal at Annexure-F dated 19.04.2023 is set aside; the matter is remitted back to respondent No.2-Appellate Authority for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law;
(iii) Petitioner to appear before respondent No.2-Appellate Authority on 21.04.2025 without awaiting further notice from respondent No.2.
(iv) All rival contentions of the parties are left open and no opinion is expressed on merits/demerits of the rival contentions.”
6. A perusal of the order passed by the appellate authority clearly shows that the appellant has not appeared before the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal on the available records, documents available in the portal and in the absence of evidence submitted by the appellant, stated that no reason is found to interfere with the impugned order passed by the original authority and dismissed the appeal. As per Section 107(12) of the KGST Act, 2017, the appellate authority is required to follow the procedure contemplated in the said provision. Section 107(12) of the KGST Act, 2017 reads as under:
“Section 107. Appeals to Appellate Authority.-
(12)The order of the Appellate Authority disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for such decision.”
7. The same is lacking in the order impugned herein that apart the appeal is a statutory remedy available to the petitioner both on facts and law and denial of statutory right amounts to denial of substantial right of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court proceedings to pass the following :
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 31.03.2026 passed in Appeal No.GST-533/2023-24 is set aside.
(iii) Matter stands remanded to the appellate authority to provide reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to make out his case and decide the matter strictly adhering to Section 107(11) and (12) of the KGST Act, 2017 and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
(iv) Since the parties are before this Court, the petitioner shall appear before the concerned appellate authority on 12.10.2026 and make his submission on the merits of the case and appellate authority to consider the same strictly in adherence to Section 107(11) and (12) of the KGST Act, 2017.
(v) The appellate authority is requested to dispose of the matter considering the Tax period 2017-2018 and dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of 2 months from the date of first appearance.
(vi) All rival contentions are left open.
