Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Anas Puthanveedi vs The Joint Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 21 March, 2025

Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar

Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar

                                                    -1-
                                                                   NC: 2025:KHC:12001
                                                                  WP No. 8510 of 2025




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                                 DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2025

                                                 BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
                                  WRIT PETITION NO. 8510 OF 2025 (T-RES)
                      BETWEEN:

                      ANAS PUTHANVEEDI
                      AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
                      PROPRIETOR OF M/S. A.K.TRADERS
                      8034, BANGALORE HONNAVARA ROAD,
                      BIRUR - 577 116.
                                                                          ...PETITIONER
                      (BY SRI. K.V. SRINIVASA PRASAD, ADVOCATE)
                      AND:
                      1.     THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
                             SUVARNA KARNATAKA VANIJYA TERIGE BHAVANA
                             GOPALGOWDA LAYOUT , 60 FEET ROAD,
                             SHIVAMOGGA -577 205.

                      2.   THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES,
                           ENFORCEMENT, SECOND FLOOR,
Digitally signed by        SWAMY ARCADE, OPP TO HDFC BANK,
LEELAVATHI S R             KUVEMPUNAGAR,
Location: High             HASSAN - 573 201.
Court of
Karnataka                                                         ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SMT. JYOTI.M.MARADI, HCGP)
                            THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
                      CONSTITUTON OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION UNDER ARTICLE 226
                      OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA QUASHING AND SETTING ASIDE THE
                      SEALING         ORDER        DCCT(ENF)/HSN/INS-AD2902250275047
                      DATED.13.02.2025  ISSUED   BY  RESPONDENT      NO.2 WITHOUT
                      JURISDICTION.

                           THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER
                      WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
                                      -2-
                                                    NC: 2025:KHC:12001
                                                   WP No. 8510 of 2025




CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR


                             ORAL ORDER

In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing and setting aside the sealing order DCCT(ENF)/HSN/INS-ad2902250275047 dated.13.02.2025 issued by Respondent No.2 without jurisdiction.
b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing of demand of penalty under the Notice DCCT(ENF)/HSN/INS-69/T.No.748 dated.07.03.2025 issued by Respondent No.2 demanding penalty equivalent to tax under section 122(1) (xx) without issue of Notice under section 73 or 74.
c) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that the Respondent Nos. 1 and 1 have failed to exercise the powers conferred upon them by the KGST Act, 2017 in deciding the Petitioner's Applications for de-sealing of godown and business premises, (Exhibit hereto), respectively is bad in law."

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3. After arguing the matter for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition may be disposed -3- NC: 2025:KHC:12001 WP No. 8510 of 2025 of leaving open all contentions and by reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to file reply along with documents to the impugned notice at Annexure-E dated 13.02.2025 and by directing respondent No.2 to consider the objections, replies, documents etc., submitted by the petitioner and take appropriate decision, as expeditiously as possible. It is submitted that the subject godown, which has been sealed by the respondents contains not only the subject case, various documents which are essential/required by the petitioner and submit his reply and as such, the petitioner may be permitted to obtain/procure the said documents by issuing necessary directions in this regard.

4. Per contra, learned HCGP submits that if the petitioner submits a reply along with the documents, respondent No.2 shall take appropriate decision/pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a stipulated timeframe.

5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of the petition by issuing certain directions.

6. In the result, I pass the following:

-4-

NC: 2025:KHC:12001 WP No. 8510 of 2025 ORDER
(i) The petition is disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions.
(ii) The concerned respondent, their officials are hereby directed to permit the petitioner to enter the subject premises and obtain/procure Photostat copies of all documents available in the subject godown in the presence of the officials on 24.03.2025 at 11:00 a.m.
(iii) The petitioner is directed to appear before respondent No.2 and submit a detailed reply along with all relevant documents and make his submission before respondent No.2 within 28.03.2025.

(iv) In pursuance of the reply and documents to be submitted by the petitioner, respondent No.2 shall consider the same and provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity and pass appropriate orders on or before 15.04.2025.

-5-

NC: 2025:KHC:12001 WP No. 8510 of 2025

(v) After respondent No.2 passes appropriate orders as directed supra, liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to take recourse to such remedies as available in law, including approaching this Court, subsequently, in accordance with law.

Sd/-

(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMC List No.: 3 Sl No.: 4