TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 580
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed: 30.06.2023 bearing Reference No. ZD2906230295852 passed by the Respondent No. 2 under Section 74 of the Karnataka Goods and Serviced Tax 2017 R/w Section 122 (1) (vii) of the Karnataka Goods and Serviced Tax/Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 Act (Annexure-A). b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the order dated: 07.10.2023 passed by the Respondent No.1 in matter bearing GST.AP 97/2023-24; wherein, the Respondent No.1 acting under Section 107(11) of the KGST/CGST Act 2017 was pleased to dismiss the appeal matte bearing GST.AP.97/2023-24 and consequently pleased to affirm the order dated: 30.06.2023 passed by the Respondent No. 2 (Annexure....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 07.10.2023. Aggrieved by the impugned orders at Annexures-A and B, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. 4. Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondents - revenue would reiterate the contentions urged in the statement of objections and submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. Before adverting to the rival submissions, it would be necessary to refer to the demand for tax, interest and penalty made by the 2nd respondent as per the show cause notice, the summary of which is extracted as hereunder:- Abstract of tax, interest and Penalty payable as per show cause notice Particulars SGST CGST IGST CESS TOTAL Tax 15110029 15110029 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r and filed an appeal only to the extent of penalty demanded from him and the 1st respondent - first appellate authority has dismissed the appeal also vide impugned order dated 07.10.2023 and the present petition is restricted only to the quantum of penalty demanded by the respondents. 8. A perusal of the impugned orders passed by the respondents will indicate that the following provisions have not been considered or appreciated while passing the impugned orders which are clearly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions contained in Sections 74 and 75 of the KGST Act and are without jurisdiction or authority of law and the same deserve to be set aside, insofar as they relate to imposing and confirming a penalty of Rs. 6,05,17,93....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ection 74(9) of the KGST Act, reads as under:- (9) The proper officer shall, after considering the representation, if any, made by the person chargeable with tax, determine the amount of tax, interest and penalty due from such person and issue an order. 11. Section 74(9) provides for consideration of the representation made by the petitioner and determination of tax and penalty due from him and to issue an order. 12. Section 75(7) of the KGST Act, reads as under:- (7) The amount of tax, interest and penalty demanded in the order shall not be in excess of the amount specified in the notice and no demand shall be confirmed on the grounds other than the grounds specified in the notice. 13. This provision create....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....han on grounds specified in the show cause notice. (iv) Whenever penalty is imposed by the adjudication order in accordance with Section 74, no penalty for the same act or omission shall be imposed on the same person under any other provision of this Act; it follows therefrom that if a penalty is imposed for certain act or omission, while passing an adjudication order under Section 79, the respondents would not be entitled to impose penalty again under Sections 122 to 128 of the KGST Act. 17. A perusal of the impugned orders will indicate that the aforesaid statutory provisions and underlying principles have not been considered or appreciated by the respondents, who have illegally and arbitrarily not only demanded higher penalty....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 2nd respondent and the impugned order at Annexure-B dated 07.10.2023 passed by the 1st respondent insofar as they relate to demand and confirmation of payment of tax of Rs. 55,350 and interest of Rs. 52,834/- from the petitioner are hereby confirmed. (iii) The impugned orders passed by the respondents only insofar as they relate to imposition of penalty in a sum Rs. 6,05,17,933/- upon the petitioner are hereby set aside. (iv) The matter is remitted back to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration afresh only to the limited / restricted extent of the penalty payable by the petitioner in accordance with law, bearing in mind the aforesaid statutory provisions as well as the observations made in the body of this order and by providing suf....