Fortune Healthcare Services Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Karnataka High Court)
Karnataka High Court held that initiation of simultaneous proceedings in relation to same year, by Assistant and Deputy Commissioner, by putting forth very same contentions is clearly impermissible in law. Accordingly, order are liable to be quashed.
Facts- Respondent No.1-Assistant Commissioner issued a pre-intimation u/s. 73(5) of the KGST Act, 2017, calling upon the petitioner to pay the differential tax amount for the tax period 2018-19. Similarly, respondent 2 – Deputy Commissioner also issued similar intimation dated 23.11.2023 to the petitioner.
Subsequently, both respondent No.1 – Assistant Commissioner and respondent No.2 – Deputy Commissioner issued two separate Show Cause Notices u/s. 73(1) of the KGST Act dated 13.12.2023 and 19.12.2023 respectively, which culminated in the adjudication proceedings and passing of two separate adjudication orders both dated 06.03.2024 by respondent Nos.1 and 2 u/s. 73(9) of the KGST Act and since the request of the petitioner before respondent No.2 to rectify the demand, which was rejected, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.
Conclusion- Held that respondent No.1-Assistant Commissioner and respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner have ventured to initiate simultaneous/dual/parallel proceedings in relation to the same year 2018-19 by putting forth the very same contentions against the petitioner, which is clearly impermissible in law and consequently, the impugned orders passed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 deserves to be quashed by reserving liberty in favour of the respondent No.2 – Deputy Commissioner to proceed further in accordance with law.
