Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2024 (5) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (5) TMI 813 - HC - GST


Issues:
The issues involved in the judgment are the challenge to a Show Cause Notice issued under Section 50 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax, 2017 (KGST) on Extra Neutral Alcohol (ENA) by the petitioner, and the maintainability of the petition without filing a written explanation in response to the notice.

Challenge to Show Cause Notice:
The petitioner sought a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the Show Cause Notice dated 07.08.2023 issued by respondent No. 6 regarding the levy of KGST on ENA supplied by the petitioner. The petitioner contended that ENA, being un-denatured spirit, is not covered under the relevant notification and that respondent No. 6 lacked the authority to issue such notices. The petitioner relied on the decision in Bihar Distillery case to argue that industries manufacturing rectified spirit for potable liquors fall under the exclusive control of the State Government. The petitioner sought relief through the writ of certiorari based on these grounds.

Respondents' Argument:
The respondents opposed the petition, stating that the Show Cause Notice was issued under Section 50 of KGST, and respondent No. 6 had the authority to levy the tax based on the Central Government's notification. They argued that the petitioner did not submit a written explanation in response to the notice, as required, and cited the decision in Union of India Vs Coastal Container Transporters Associations to support their contention that challenging a Show Cause Notice without submitting a written explanation is not maintainable. They also referred to a decision of the Division Bench of Allahabad High Court to counter the petitioner's reliance on the Bihar Distillery case.

Judgment and Dismissal:
The Hon'ble Court noted that the petitioner did not provide a written explanation or seek a personal hearing as offered in the Show Cause Notice. The Court observed that the petitioner rushed to challenge the notice without availing the opportunity to present his defense. Despite the petitioner's reliance on the Bihar Distillery case, the Court referred to a recent decision of the Apex Court emphasizing the importance of submitting a written explanation before challenging a Show Cause Notice. The Court concluded that the petitioner's failure to provide an explanation rendered the writ petition not maintainable and dismissed the petition accordingly.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Show Cause Notice for KGST on ENA due to the petitioner's failure to submit a written explanation as required by law. The Court emphasized the importance of availing the opportunity to present a defense before seeking judicial intervention, citing relevant legal precedents.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates