- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38679-DB WA No. 1325 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT APPEAL No. 1325 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S. SBR GROUP, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM REGISTERED UNDER THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT No.24/5, OPPOSITE TO SHELL PETROL BANK, KADUGODI, HOSAKOTE MAIN ROAD, SEEGEHALLI, WHITEFIELD BENGALURU - 560067. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SRI T. VENUGOPAL, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O SRI T. VENKATARAMANA, HAVING RESIDENCE AT: 2-357-5, SOCIETY COLONY, RAMALAYAM CHITTOR- 517325. …APPELLANT (BY SRI LAKSHMI MENON, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38679-DB WA No. 1325 of 2025 AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 331, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES DIRECTORATE OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX, OFFICE OF DGSTO - 05, BENGALURU - 560047. 3. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCIAL TAX BUILDING, VANIJYA THERIGE KARYALAYA, BENGALURU - 560009. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K. HEMA KUMAR, AGA) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO QUASH AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 04.07.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP No.35676/2024. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38679-DB WA No. 1325 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. ARAVIND) This writ appeal under Section 4 of the High Court Act, 1961, is by the appellant challenging the order in W.P. No.35676/2024 dated 04.07.2025 wherein the writ petition is dismissed, relegating the petitioner to alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Karnataka Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short '2017 Act'). 2. Smt. Lakshmi Menon, learned counsel appearing for the appellant at the first instance, submitted that the show- cause notice resulting in the adjudication order was issued without a digital signature and hence invalid. Learned counsel further submits that as the show-cause notice was invalid, the writ petition was maintainable. It is submitted that learned Single Judge committed an error in relegating the petitioner to the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the 2017 Act without adjudicating the said issue. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38679-DB WA No. 1325 of 2025 3. Per contra, Sri. K. Hemakumar, learned AGA appearing for the respondent-State, produced the show-cause notice dated 27.05.2024, wherein the same is digitally signed. Learned counsel for the appellant on perusal of the said show- cause notice fairly submits that the show-cause notice dated 27.05.2024 is digitally signed by the concerned officer. In that view, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order of the adjudicating authority is dated 30.08.2024, and the time limit for filing the appeal under Section 107 of the 2017 Act is three months from the date of service of the order, and the appellate authority is empowered to condone the delay of only one month. Learned counsel submits that in that view, the appellant is not in a position to even avail the remedy of appeal under Section 107 as per the decision of the learned Single Judge. Learned counsel submits that the fresh time limit for filing an appeal under Section 107 may be fixed by this Court by considering the time spent by the appellant in the writ petition and in the writ appeal before this Court. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38679-DB WA No. 1325 of 2025 5. Sri.K. Hemakumar, learned AGA, is unable to dispute the dates stated by learned counsel for the appellant. 6. We note that the order of the adjudicating authority is dated 30.08.2024. The appellant has preferred a writ petition on 13.12.2024. The writ petition came to be rejected on 04.07.2025, and this appeal was filed on 02.08.2025. The appellant, while challenging the adjudication order dated 30.08.2024, has preferred the writ petition within the time provided for appeal under Section 107 of the 2017 Act. It cannot be said that the appellant was not diligent in exercising rights against the order impugned. 7. Considering the overall facts and the dates referred above, this Court is of the considered view that the appellant is to be granted a reasonable time to present the appeal, which will be considered by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the 2017 Act without raising any issue of limitation. 8. In the facts of the present case, we deem it appropriate to permit the appellant to file an appeal under Section 107 of the 2017 Act within fifteen days from today. If an appeal under Section 107 is presented within fifteen days as - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38679-DB WA No. 1325 of 2025 observed above, the appeal shall be decided on merits without raising any issue of limitation. 9. Except to the above observations, the writ appeal is not entertained. Pending IA, if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21