Lack of Required Particulars in Section 74 Proceedings Results in Reclassification to Section 73 Granting Eligibility for GST Amnesty Scheme | HC

Case Details: Srinivasa Shetty vs. Commercial Tax Officer - [2025] 173 taxmann.com 295 (Karnataka)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• S.R. Krishna Kumar, J.
• Prajwal Swamy M., Adv., for the Petitioner.
• Hema Kumar. K., AGA, for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged the order, issued by the respondent Commercial Tax Officer, which was styled as being passed under Section 74 of the CGST/KGST Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that although the order invoked Section 74, there were no allegations of fraud, misstatement, or suppression of facts, which are essential ingredients for invoking that section. Instead, the contents and nature of the proceedings aligned more appropriately with Section 73 of the Act. On this basis, the petitioner sought the benefit of the GST Amnesty Scheme under Section 128A, which is applicable to cases falling under Section 73. It was further submitted that the impugned order had been passed ex parte, without granting sufficient opportunity to the petitioner. The petitioner thus sought quashing of the impugned order, a direction for reassessment under Section 73, and access to the amnesty benefits.

High Court Held

The Karnataka High Court held that the impugned order lacked the necessary ingredients of Section 74 and was in effect a proceeding under Section 73. Noting the ex parte nature of the order, the Court set it aside and remitted the matter for fresh consideration under Section 73, directing the respondent to allow the petitioner to apply for amnesty benefits. The Court clarified that the order was passed in the special facts of the case and would not serve as a precedent.