Case Law Details
Yallappa R. Patil Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Karnataka High Court)
The Karnataka High Court considered a writ appeal challenging the learned Single Judge’s order dated 17.07.2025, which had rejected the writ petition and relegated the petitioner to the Appellate Authority to challenge the impugned orders.
During the hearing, the appellant submitted that he may be relegated to avail the statutory remedy of first appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, stating that the reasons for delay were genuine as set out in paragraph 14 of the writ petition and the submissions recorded in paragraph 4 of the learned Single Judge’s order. The learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the Court could pass appropriate orders regarding limitation.
Taking note of the grounds urged and the peculiar facts of the case, the High Court upheld the order of the learned Single Judge but relegated the petitioner to avail the remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act against the order dated 22.07.2019 cancelling registration and the order dated 13.08.2024 bearing Reference No. 317/ACCT/AUD-2/DRC-07/13/24-25/B175.
The Court directed that if the appeals are filed within four weeks from the date of the order, they shall be taken on record without raising any objection on limitation. The Court clarified that the order was passed in the peculiar facts of the case and should not be treated as a precedent. The writ appeal was accordingly disposed of, and pending applications, if any, were held not to survive for consideration.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
The present appeal is filed challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 17.07.2025, whereby the petition was rejected relegating the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority to challenge the orders impugned in the writ.
2. After hearing the matter for sometime, counsel to the appellant submits that the petitioner may be relegated to avail remedy of first appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘CGST Act’) and submits that the reasons for delay are genuine as made out at paragraph No.14 of the writ petition as well as the submissions as noticed in paragraph No.4 of the order of the learned Single Judge.
3. The learned AGA submits that insofar as limitation is concerned, Court may pass appropriate orders.
4. Taking note of the grounds made out as noticed above and the peculiar facts of this case, while we uphold the order of the learned Single Judge, the petitioner is relegated to avail of remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act as regards the impugned orders dated 22.07.2019 regarding cancellation of registration as well as against the order dated 13.08.2024 vide reference No.317/ACCT/AUD-2/DRC-07/13/24-25/B175.
5. Accordingly, if the appeals are filed against the said orders within a period of 4 weeks from today, the same are to be taken on record, without raising any objection on limitation.
6. It is made clear that this order is passed in the peculiar facts of this case and may not be treated to be a precedent in other matters.
7. In view of the above, the writ appeal is disposed of.
Pending applications, if any, do not survive for consideration.
Author Bio
