- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28102 WP No. 9617 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9617 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. A.S. SAMPATH KUMAR, S/O. SRI. N. SRINIVASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, NO.36, AREHALLI VIL, NELAVAGILU POST, NANDAGUDI POST, HOSAKOTE TALUK BANGALORE - 562 122. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA B HANJER, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (AUDIT)-5.10, DGSTO-5, ROOM NO.606, 6TH FLOOR, B BLOCK, VTK-2, RAJENDRANAGAR, NGV COMPLEX, BANGALORE - 560 047. Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28102 WP No. 9617 of 2026 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, THE RURAL DRINKING WATER AND SANITATION DEPARTMENT, NO.1088/302/2, WARD NO.14, PETECHAMANAHALLI, VIJAYASHREE NILAYA, BYPASS, KOLAR - 563 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. HEMAKUMAR, AGA) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF ANY WRIT DECLARING THAT THE DEMAND OF GST FOR THE TAX PERIODS 2017-18, 2018-19 AND 2019-20 ON THE BASIS OF TDS STATEMENT / FORM- 26AS IS HIGHLY ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND IN EXCESS OF THE POWERS CONFERRED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX / STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX ACTS, 2017 AND ETC. 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 question for consideration is whether this Court must permit adjudication under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/ Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [for - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28102 WP No. 9617 of 2026 short, the 'CGST Act/KGST Act'] so that the pet itioner can avail the benefit of the Scheme under Section 128A of the CGST Act/KGST Act as introduced by the Finance Act, 2024. The petitioner's case is that the adjudication is based on the TDS deducted by the different State Government Organizations for whom the petitioner has executed Work Contract Services for the period prior to the GST regime and the petitioner has not filed returns because of the understanding that he would not be liable to pay any GST for the services rendered prior to the GST Regime. 2. Sri Raghavendra B. Hanjer, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that though the show cause notices are issued alleging deliberate omission and there are concluded adjudication orders based on those show cause notices, this Court may consider directing the second respondent to pass orders to treat these impugned adjudication orders to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28102 WP No. 9617 of 2026 be orders under Section 73 [instead of Section 74] of the CGST Act/KGST Act as that would entitle the petitioner to claim the benefit of the Scheme under Section 128A of the CGST Act/KGST Act in terms of the timelines notified vide Notification No.21/2024 dated 08.10.2024. 3. Sri K. Hema Kumar, the learned Additional Government Advocate, is heard in the light of this request. The learned Additional Government Advocate invites this Court's attention to the import of the expression 'suppression' as found in Explanation-II appended to Section 74 of the CGST Act/KGST Act. The question for consideration is whether the petitioner, who is willing to offer taxes, should be allowed the benefit of waiver of interest and penalty notwithstanding his case that the returns are filed without disclosing the liability only because the services were rendered prior to the GST regime. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28102 WP No. 9617 of 2026 4. This Court must observe that the subject receipts are not part of the petitioner's Returns. This Court is persuaded to opine that there is no deliberate omission or suppression, and because the petitioner is willing to offer taxes subject to the benefit of the claim, this Court is also of the view that the petition must be disposed of calling upon the second respondent to pass orders treating the impugned Order to be Order under Section 73 of the CGST Act/KGST Act. As such, the impugned Assessment Orders - Annexures - D1, E1 and F1 are read as Orders under Section 73 of the CGST Act/KGST Act with the petitioner being entitled to file applications in terms of the Notification dated 08.10.2024. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE NV