M/S. Comorin Consulting Services India Private Limited, v. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9878 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN:

M/S. COMORIN CONSULTING SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HAVING OFFICE AT 133/2, 4TH FLOOR, JANARDHAN TOWERS, RESIDENCY ROAD, RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU-560025 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR MR. JEEVA KIRUBAKAR S. S/O. SRI. SWAMYDHAS CHELLADHURAI, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SWAMY M M., ADVOCATE)

AND:

¶1THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, NO.669/L, 3RD FLOOR, FIRST STAGE, 2ND BLOCK, HBR LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560043.

¶2THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (APPEALS-5) TTMC BUILDING, SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560027.

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA -e2e-e NC:(2026:KHC:35045( WP(No.(9878(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

3.-DEUTSCHE-BANK-26-27,-GROUND-FLOOR,--RAHEJA-TOWERS,--OPPOSITE-MANIPAL-CENTRE,--BANGALORE-560-001.--…RESPONDENTS-(BY-SRI.K.-HEMA-KUMAR.,-ADVOCATE)---THIS-WP-IS-FILED-UNDER-ARTICLES-226-AND-227-OF-THE-CONSTITUTION-OF-INDIA-PRAYING-TO-QUASHING-THE-ORDER-DATED-30.04.2024-BEARING-NO.-FORM-GST-DRC-07-PASSED-BY-THE-RESPONDENT-NO.1-UNDER-SECTION-73(9)-OF-THE-GST-ACT-VIDE-ANNEXURE--D;-B.-QUASH-THE-APPELLATE-ORDER-DATED-21.08.2025-PASSED-BY-THE-NO.2-DISMISSING-THE-APPEAL-IN-NO.ZD290825081102C-FILED-UNDER-SECTION-107-OF-THE-GST-RESPONDENT-ACT-VIDE-ANNEXURE---F;-C.-ISSUE-A-WRIT-OF-MANDAMUS-DIRECTING-THE-RESPONDENTS-TO-DEFREEZE-THE-PETITIONERS-CURRENT-BANK-ACCOUNT-OF-THE-PETITIONER-NO.000035447640019-AND-000035447640028-MAINTAINED-WITH-THE-RESPONDENT-NO.3,-THE-DEUTSCHE-BANK-VIDE-ANNX-A-AND-A1-RESPECTIVELY.---THIS-PETITION,-COMING-ON-FOR-ORDERS,-THIS-DAY,-ORDER-WAS-MADE-THEREIN-AS-UNDER:-CORAM:-HON'BLE-MR.-JUSTICE-B-M-SHYAM-PRASAD-

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner asserts that it is a software company providing IT consulting and software related services to its overseas as well as local clients. The petitioner is aggrieved by [i] the Order-in-Appeal dated

21.08.2025 [Annexure-F] rejecting the petitioner's appeal in No. ZD290825081102C and [ii] the Adjudication Order dated 30.04.2024 [Annexure-D]. These impugned orders are for the period 2018-

¶19The Adjudication Order is premised in the assertion that the Show Cause Notice is issued to the petitioner, but the petitioner has filed no response.

¶2Sri Swamy M M, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the proceedings are concluded because of alleged discrepancies in declaration of turnover as export of service between Forms GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 and that the petitioner could not for bonafide reasons respond to the Show

Cause Notice in Form GST DRC-01. The learned counsel canvasses the following: [i] The Petitioner has not mentioned the invoice-wise Export details in Table 6A of GSTR-1, but the petitioner has declared both the Taxable Turnover and the Zero-Rated Turnover in GSTR-3B. The Petitioner can justify the declarations so filed because its Zero-rated services are for export services. [ii] The assessment proceedings are completed observing that the petitioner has not filed any reply when in fact the petitioner has filed the Reply dated

29.02.2024 [Annexure-C] to the Intimation dated 20.11.2023 in Form GST DRC-01A. [iii] The Board Circulars dated 27.12.2022 and 17.07.2023 are issued covering the subject tax period which envisages an opportunity to a Registered Taxable

Person [RTP] to produce documents to establish the nature of transactions.

Sri Swamy M also invites this Court attention to the explanation offered in the Memorandum of Petition for non-participation referring to the dispute between the Directors, initiation of criminal proceedings and change in the Auditor.

¶3Sri K Hema Kumar, a learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents, is heard for the disposal of the petition examining whether the petitioner must be extended another reasonable opportunity in view of the above. The first respondent has referred to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 29.12.2023 and the opportunity being granted in the following terms: "9.1 This office is directed to re-list this petition on has not received any of the reply till the date of passing the order even after providing with sufficient opportunity to explain their stand."

¶4The petitioner's appeal is rejected on the ground of limitation observing that the delay beyond 120 days from the date of the Adjudication Order cannot be condoned in law. The petitioner asserts that the appeal could not be filed within the time allowed because the Adjudication order is an ex-parte order. The petitioner contends that the mismatch between Forms GSTR-3B and GSTR-1 can be explained with the support of the documents, and certificates as permissible in terms of the Board Circulars. The circumstances asserted by the petitioners and the terms of the Circular persuade this Court to opine that the petitioner must have another opportunity, and hence, the following.

ORDER

The petition is allowed and the Order-in-Appeal dated

21.08.2025 [Annexure-F], and the Adjudication Order

dated

30.04.2024 [Annexure-D] are quashed subject to the following terms. [a] The proceedings are restored to the first respondent for due consideration.

[b] The petitioner is permitted to file, along with the certified copy of this Order, the copies of the documents to show the genuineness of the transactions.

[c] The petitioner shall produce these documents by 14.08.2026 and the first respondent shall consider these documents and then conclude the proceedings by a reasoned order.

Sd/-(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE AN/-