M/S PADMAVATHI ASSOCIATES vs THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55627
WP No. 29734 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010649852026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 6 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 29734 OF 2026 (T-RES)
BETWEEN:
M/S PADMAVATHI ASSOCIATES
BEING A REGISTERED
PARTNERSHIP FIRM
HAVING ITS REGISTERED
OFFICE AT NO. 228, B BLOCK,
APMC YARD BANDIPALYA,
MYSURU - 570 025 KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING PARTNER
SRI. A R GANESHWAR
S/O. LATE A R RAMASETTY
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
…PETITIONER
(BY SMT. SRUTI CHAGANTI., ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
VANAMALA
N
Location:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER
LOCAL GOOD AND SERVICES
TAX OFFICE-195
SHESHADRI LYER BUILDING
DEWAN'S ROAD, MYSURU - 570 024.
2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
COMMERCIAL TAXES
LOCAL GOODS AND SERVICES
TAX OFFICE - 195
SHESHADRI BHAVAN,
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55627
WP No. 29734 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010649852026
DEEWANS ROAD,
MYSURU-570 004.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA
AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU - 560 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.JYOTI M MARADI., HCGP)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
1. QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 29.02.2024 BEARING
REF NO. CTO/LGSTO-195/2023-24 PASSED BY
RESPONDENT NO.1 PRODUCED HEREWITH AS
ANNEXURE- N; 2. QUASHING THE RECOVERY NOTICE
DATED 03.08.2026 BEARING FILE NO. ACCT LGSTO-
195/2A-3B/2026-27 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1
PRODUCED HEREWITH AS ANNEXURE- C;
3. DIRECTION REMITTING THE MATTER TO
RESPONDENT NO.1 TO THE STAGE OF THE SHOW
CAUSE NOTICE DATED 20.12.2023 BEARING REF. NO.
ZO2902240745275 PRODUCED HEREWITH AS
ANNEXURE- L, AND DIRECTING THAT THE PETITIONER
BE AFFORDED A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO FILE
ITS REPLY THERETO AND BE HEARD, BEFORE ANY
FRESH ORDER IS PASSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55627
WP No. 29734 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010649852026
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is a partnership firm of a father
and son, and between June and October 2024, the
father, who was the Managing Partner, has lost his
wife and his father to prolonged illness. The petitioner
has called in question the following contending that
the petitioner, because of compelling circumstances,
could not verify the Intimation and the Notice
uploaded on the portal.
Annexures
Particulars Dated Provisions
of KGST
Act, 2017
Adjudication 29.02.2024 73 N
Order
Recovery 03.08.2026 79 C
Notice
Ms. Sruti C, the learned counsel for the
petitioner, and Ms. Jyoti M. Maradi, a learned High
Court Government Pleader, who accepts notice for
the respondents, are heard on whether this Court
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55627
WP No. 29734 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010649852026
must interfere with the impugned Adjudication Order
and the Recovery Notice to restore the proceedings
with opportunity to the petitioner to file Response to
the Show Cause Notice dated 20.12.2023. Ms. Sruti
C emphasizes the following.
[A] The adjudication is for the tax period
2018-19 and the proceedings are
initiated because of an alleged
mismatch between Form GSTR-3B and
Form GSTR-2A. The petitioner is
bonafide claiming ITC and can produce
documents to show the genuineness of
the transactions.
[B] Insofar as this tax period, a Circular
issued enables a recipient of a supply
to produce documents to justify the
transactions even if there is a mismatch
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55627
WP No. 29734 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010649852026
because of certain shortfall between
Form GSTR-3B and Form GSTR-2A.
[C] The petitioner, after service of the
impugned Recovery Notice, has been
able to access Intimation in Form GST
DRC-01A, and the petitioner has
ascertained that this Intimation is
issued to the petitioner calling upon the
petitioner to show cause against an
excess Input Tax Credit [ITC] of
Rs.7,35,894/- but the impugned
Adjudication Order results in demand
on the same ground in a sum of
Rs.1,30,148 /-.
The petitioner has not reasoned this difference
between the Intimation, and the first respondent has
not reasoned the outcome in the Adjudication Order.
If these first reasons persuade this Court to interfere
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55627
WP No. 29734 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010649852026
with the impugned Adjudication Order and the
Recovery Notice, the next ground is the personal
reasons assigned persuade this Court to interfere and
opine that the petitioner must have an opportunity to
show cause against either Rs.7,35,894/- or
Rs.1,30,148/- being the basis for allegation of excess
ITC claim. This Court must also observe that the first
respondent should consider the petitioner's Response
and the documents in the light of the fact that the
adjudication is concluded only for an alleged excess
claim of Rs.1,30,148/- as against the claim of
Rs.7,35,894/- in Form GST DRC-01A. In the light of
the afore, the following:
ORDER
[A] The petition is allowed in-part.
[B] The following orders are quashed.
Particulars Dated Provisions
of KGST
Act, 2017
Annexures
Adjudication 29.02.2024 73 N
Order
Recovery 03.08.2026 79 C
Notice
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:55627
WP No. 29734 of 2026
CNR: KAHC010649852026
[C] The petitioner, without further notice,
shall appear before the respondent on
30.11.2026.
[D] The petitioner is reserved with liberty to
file a certified copy of this Order along
with documents to justify its claim as
genuine transaction.
[E] The first respondent is called upon to
consider the petitioner's Reply and the
documents in the light of this Court's
observation as aforesaid.
Sd/-
(B M SHYAM PRASAD)
JUDGE
AN/-