- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6431 WP No. 31437 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT WRIT PETITION NO. 31437 OF 2024 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S UTSTARCOM INC, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT: THAPAR NIKETAN, 2ND FLOOR, 7/4, BURTON ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 025. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B. PRAMOD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED THROUGH THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS-1) 2ND FLOOR, TTMC 'B' BLOCK, BMTC BUILDING, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027. 2. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)-1.4, DGSTO-1, BENGALURU - 560 009. 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS), YESHWANTHPUR, BENGALURU - 560 022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. HEMAKUMAR, AGA) Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6431 WP No. 31437 of 2024 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 266 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I) DIRECTIONS / ORDERS IN THE NATURE WHEREBY THE OBLIGATION OF THE SECTION 62(4) OF THE KARNATAKA VALUE ADDED TAX ACT, 2003 MAY BE RELAXED FOR THE PETITIONER FOR PAYMENT OF 30 PERCENT OF THE AMOUNT AS ASKED IN THE DEMAND NOTICE BEARING NO. 179828775.02/ 23/01/2024 DATED 23/01/2024 (ANN-C) ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF R2 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT ORAL ORDER Heard Sri B. Pramod, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Hemakumar, learned AGA for respondents. Perused the entire writ petition papers. 2. Though the matter is listed for preliminary hearing with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal. 3. Sri B. Pramod, learned counsel would submit that petitioner is before this Court questioning Annexure-C Demand Notice dated 23.01.2024 as well as the order dated 17.01.2024 passed under Section 39(1) of the KVAT - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6431 WP No. 31437 of 2024 Act, 2003 (for short 'the Act'). Learned counsel would submit that the petitioner/Concern is non functional since 2017. Petitioner to challenge the order dated 17.01.2024, shall have to deposit 30% of the amount demanded in terms of Section 62(4) of the KVAT Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is seeking waiver of the deposit, since the petitioner/Concern is non- functional and there is inordinate delay in completing the proceedings by the respondent/authority. 4. Per contra, Sri K. Hema Kumar, learned AGA for the respondent would submit that provisions of the Act would not permit waiver of pre-deposit as required under KVAT Act and only in exceptional circumstances, the waiver could be considered. It is his submission that petitioner has not made out any extraordinary ground to seek waiver of the pre-deposit. Thus he submits that petitioner is not entitled for any relief. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, I am of the view that petitioner has not made out any ground to waive the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6431 WP No. 31437 of 2024 pre-deposit of 30% to file an appeal against the order at Annexure-C dated 17.01.2024. The reason assigned by the petitioner seeking waiver is that there is inordinate delay in concluding the proceedings and that the petitioner/Concern has closed down its operation and business since 2017. Pre-deposit as required cannot be waived unless compelling ground is pressed into service. The ground urged by the petitioner that there was delay in concluding the proceedings and that the Concern had closed down its business from 2017 onwards, cannot be considered as compelling reasons to waive the pre- deposit. 6. In the above circumstances, there is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly the petition stands rejected. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6 CT: BHK