R.S. Enterprises Vs Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-1) (Karnataka High Court)
The Karnataka High Court has rejected a petition by R.S. Enterprises challenging the constitutional validity of Section 16(2) of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017. The petitioner also sought to “read down” the phrase “has been actually paid” in the said section to “ought to have been paid.” Additionally, the petition questioned an order dated December 19, 2023, issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-1), alleging it to be illegal, violative of natural justice, and time-barred.
During the arguments, the counsel for R.S. Enterprises opted not to press the prayers related to the constitutional challenge, focusing solely on the validity of the demand order. The petitioner’s counsel contended that the impugned order was flawed, primarily arguing that it was barred by limitation under Section 73(9) and 73(10) of the GST Act. According to the petitioner, no proceedings were initiated within the three-year period prescribed from the date of furnishing the annual returns for the financial year in question, rendering the current proceedings and order invalid.
Conversely, the Assistant Government Advocate (AGA) representing the respondents argued that the writ petition itself was not maintainable due to the availability of an alternative efficacious remedy under Section 107 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The AGA cited a precedent from the same High Court in Writ Petition No. 102932/2024, which, under similar circumstances, dismissed a writ petition and directed the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal.
