TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (7) TMI 832
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er in the nature of Certiorari to quash / set aside the order dated 29.04.2025, in Appeal No. 04/2025-26 GST (Commr.) A-II, passed by the 1st Respondent and produced as Annexure-M. (ii) Issue a writ or such other order in the nature of Certiorari to quash/set aside the Order passed by the 2nd Respondent dated 19.07.2024 bearing No. GEXCOM/ADJN/GST/ADC/119/2023 produced at Annexure-E; and (iii) Issue a writ or such other order in the nature of Certiorari to quash/set aside the Order passed by the 3rd Respondent dated 30.08.2024 in File No. 118/DGSTO- 06/ACCT(A)6.3/ADJ/Section-73/2024 produced at Annexure-F; and (iv) Issue a writ or such other order in the nature of Certiorari to quash/set aside the notice dated 30.05.2025, bearing N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nable opportunity of hearing, and that the same was not communicated to the petitioner in the manner known to law. It is contended that the petitioner was unaware of the passing of the said order and came to know of it only belatedly. Immediately upon obtaining knowledge of the order, the petitioner took steps to prefer an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act. However, respondent No. 1 rejected the appeal on the ground that the same was barred by limitation, holding that the statutory period prescribed for preferring an appeal had lapsed. 6. It is further submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was neither willful nor deliberate but was occasioned on account of the non-service or defective service of the adjudication order by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ority has dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay, without adverting to or giving due consideration to the liberty expressly granted by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the earlier round of litigation. 9. In order to appreciate the nature and scope of such liberty, it would be apposite to extract paragraph No.2 of the said order, which reads as under: "2. The petitioner contends that it is registered as a dealer under the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, 'the KGST Act, 2017'). The Assessing Officer passed an order of assessment for the tax period from 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2020 under Section 73(9) of the KGST Act, 2017 on 23.07.2024. The petitioner contends that the Assessing Officer did not co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from the impugned order dated 29.04.2025 that the appellate authority has dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay, without considering the period spent by the petitioner in bona fide prosecution of proceedings before this Court, which ought to have been excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. The failure to give effect to the exclusion of time as mandated under Section 14, despite a clear direction from this Court, amounts to not only an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction but also a contravention of the judicial discipline expected of statutory authorities. 12. Therefore, the order of respondent No. 1 is rendered unsustainable in law. On this short but significant ground alone, the impugned appellate order is liable to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have time and again held that once an appeal is entertained, any collateral or parallel adjudication on the same cause of action by another authority must be avoided, as it defeats the purpose of the statutory remedy and offends principles of natural justice, judicial discipline, and fair procedure. In the present case, the order passed by respondent No. 3, despite full knowledge of the pending appeal and judicial directions, is arbitrary and legally unsustainable, and is therefore liable to be quashed. In view of the foregoing, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. The impugned order dated 29.04.2025 passed by the respondent No. 1 in Appeal No.04/2025-26 GST (Commr.) AII, produced at Anne....