Case Details: Bangalore Steel Distributors vs. Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax - [2026] 184 taxmann.com 144 (Karnataka)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- S Sunil Dutt Yadav, J.
-
Santosh Sagar Kapilavai, Adv. for the Petitioner.
-
Akash Shetty, Adv. & Hemakumar, AGA for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner challenged the Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, contending that the petitioner’s reply and submissions were not considered during adjudication. It asserted that the purchases in question were made from a registered supplier and that valid tax invoices were issued. It was further submitted that the supplier had filed GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B and that the transactions were reflected in the petitioner’s GSTR-2A. It was contended that supporting submissions and documents had been furnished before the adjudicating authority; however, the authority proceeded to pass a non-speaking order without addressing the reply. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking reconsideration. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the adjudicating authority failed to consider the reply and supporting submissions furnished by the petitioner, resulting in a non-speaking order and a breach of the principles of natural justice embodied in Sections 75 of the CGST Act and the Karnataka GST Act. The Court observed that the petitioner’s assertion regarding purchases remained uncontroverted on record and required proper adjudication on merits by the competent authority. It further noted that the impugned order did not address these submissions. Accordingly, the Court set aside the Order-in-Original and remitted the matter to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration after granting a fresh hearing.
The post Non-Speaking GST Order Ignoring Reply Set Aside | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
