- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26156 WP No. 11631 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 11631 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: ACCESS DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SHRI S. SANDEEP REDDY SON OF SHRI K. SATHYANARAYANA AGED 40 YEARS, HAVING OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR 217, RAHEJA CHAMBERS, NO. 12, MUSEUM ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 0014. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRADYUMNA HEJIB., ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX SOUTH DIVISION-4 BENGALURU SOUTH COMMISSIONERATE 7TH FLOOR, 'C' WING KENDRIYA SADAN, KORAMANGALA, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26156 WP No. 11631 of 2026 BENGALURU - 560034. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SHISHIRA AMARNATH.,ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH ORDER IN ORIGINAL SL. NO. 196/2022 SD-4 (2022095700000000 A1FD) DATED 09.09.2022 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT (ANNX-A); QUASH RECOVERY NOTICE IN FORM GST DRC-13 BEARING FILE NO. GEXCOM/TAR/D/ST/3426/2025-CGST-DIV-SD-4- COMMRTE) DATED 19.01.2026 (ANNX-B). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the Order-in- Original dated 09.09.2022 under the Finance Act, 1994 [for short, 'the Act']. The petitioner cannot dispute that this is an order that could be appealed - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26156 WP No. 11631 of 2026 under Section 107 of the Act, but the petitioner has invoked this Court's jurisdiction relying upon the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in M/s. Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust Vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax in W.P. No.11154/2023 and connected matters dated 03.07.2024. 2. Mr. Pradyumna Hejib, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the impugned Order- in-Original is an ex parte order without due service of notice and is based on an information furnished by the Income Tax Department acting under an agreement signed between the Central Board for Direct Taxes and the Central Board for Indirect Taxes but without due opportunity. The learned counsel argues that in very similar circumstances based on an undertaking given by the concerned from the department, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has disposed of the writ petition in W.P.No.11154/2023 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26156 WP No. 11631 of 2026 and other matters [such as in W.P.No.20351/2024] restoring the proceedings for reconsideration with due opportunity. 3. Mr. Shishir Amaranath, a learned Standing counsel who is called upon to accept notice for the respondent, is heard and when queried, the learned counsel submits that the undertaking as recorded in W.P.No.11154/2023 was to ensure that the designated officers looked into complaints of similar nature but with march of time, the jurisdictional Officers, such as the respondent in the present case, are empowered to extend an opportunity and decide on the merits of the cause that could be shown. 4. This Court finds that the outcome in the writ petition must turn in the light of the afore circumstances notwithstanding the fact that the petition is filed almost four years from the date of the impugned order because the petitioner asserts that it - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26156 WP No. 11631 of 2026 has not been served with notice or been extended an opportunity othwerwise, and more importantly, the petitioner proposes to rely upon the statutory provisions to contend that the subject transaction does not result in any consequence to pay certain taxes. This Court finds that all these circumstances must be considered before a liability is fastened on the petitioner. Hence the following: ORDER [A] The petition is allowed-in-part and the impugned Order-in-Original and the demand notice for tax, cess, interest and penalty dated 19.01.2026 [Annexure - A] are quashed restoring the proceedings to the respondent for reconsideration. [B] The petitioner shall, without further notice, file response, if any, with the respondent by 29.08.2026 even without waiting for a certified copy of this order. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26156 WP No. 11631 of 2026 [C] The respondent shall consider all the circumstances without non-suiting the petitioner on the ground of delay. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE NV