Duplicate GST Orders Passed for Same Tax Period: Karnataka HC directs fresh hearing on GST cancellation [Read Order]

The Karnataka High Court set aside a series of ex-parte GST orders after finding that the authorities had passed two separate adjudication orders for the same tax period on identical grounds, terming it a case of order duplication. The court directed fresh hearing on the GST registration cancellation.

M/s Tech Desire Infra Private Limited, the Petitioner, challenged adjudication orders passed under Section 73 of the CGST/KGST Act. The orders pertained to the Financial Year 2019-20.

The Petitioner contended that the proceedings resulted in three ex-parte orders (Annexures A, B, and C series). Crucially, it was pointed out that orders at Annexures-A and C were passed for the same tax period on the same ground of mismatch of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The order at Annexure-B1 was passed regarding discrepancies between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B.

The Petitioner argued that the lapse in not replying to the show cause notices was bona fide as the company’s GST registration had been cancelled in 2023, which hindered their ability to track and respond to the proceedings effectively. The Petitioner sought an opportunity to place material on record to reconcile the ITC mismatches.

The Additional Government Advocate opposed the plea, submitting that notices were duly served and the orders were passed due to the Petitioner's non-participation.

The bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav noted that the orders were indeed ex-parte and that the contention regarding the duplication of orders (Annexures A and C) for the same tax period required reconsideration. The Court observed that the matter should be remitted to the adjudicating authority to allow the Petitioner to demonstrate their case on merits.

The Court observed:

“It is the contention of the petitioner that orders at Annexures-A and C series are passed regarding the same tax period and amounts to duplication of orders... it would be appropriate to remit the matter for reconsideration by putting the petitioner on terms.”

In view of this, the High Court set aside all the impugned orders and remitted the matter to the Commercial Tax Officer for fresh adjudication from the stage of reply to the show cause notice. The Court put the Petitioner on terms, directing them to pay 10% of the disputed tax demand under Annexure-A and B series as a condition for the remand. The Petitioner was directed to appear before the authority on 25.05.2026.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates