HC Sets Aside GST Order Due to Non-Service of SCN

Case Details: R K Traders vs. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax - [2025] 174 taxmann.com 1035 (Karnataka)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• S.R. Krishna Kumar, J.
• Shreehari Kutsa, Adv. for the Petitioner.
• Hema Kumar, AGA & Vignesh. S. Shetty, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner is engaged in trading business, was issued a pre-intimation notice under Rule 142(1A), to which it responded. However, a subsequent show-cause notice and another pre-intimation notice were allegedly not served on the petitioner. Unaware of these proceedings, the petitioner did not respond, leading to an ex-parte order under Section 74(9) confirming a demand. A recovery notice followed, prompting the petitioner to approach the High Court seeking relief.

High Court Held

The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka observed that although the petitioner did not respond to the show-cause notice or contest the proceedings, he had submitted a reply to the initial pre-intimation notice and claimed to be unaware of the later notices due to non-service. Recognising the petitioner’s assertion of bona fide omission and unavoidable circumstances, the Court held that it was just and proper to take a justice-oriented approach. It set aside the ex parte order and remitted the matter back to the Assistant Commissioner for fresh adjudication. It was also clarified that failure to appear on the given date would lead to automatic recall of the relief granted and revival of the order.