^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

M/S THOPPIL AGENCIES vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
(Karnataka High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR

Pet. Counsel

Arvind Kamath

S.m.kalwad

Res. Counsel

Shivaprabhu Hiremath

Petitioner / Applicant	M/S THOPPIL AGENCIES
Respondent	THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES
Court	Karnataka High Court
State	Karnataka
Date	Aug 12, 2020
Order No.	Writ Petition No. 116528/2019 (T-RES)
Citation	2020(8) TAXREPLY 3208
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AA |

ORDER
This petition is filed seeking quashing of the impugned penalty order at Annexure-E bearing No. No. ACCT/ENF-2/HBL/ORD 04/2019-20 dated 25.11.2019 in Form GST OV 09 by the respondent No.1 under Section 129 (3) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (for short ‘the Act’) and for other relief’s. 2.I have heard Sri Arvind Kamath, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3.In addition to making submissions with regard to the various contentions urged by the petitioner in the petition with reference to the documents and the impugned order, learned Senior counsel also submitted that the impugned order is violative of principles of natural justice. He points out that a perusal of the show cause notice at Annexure-B4 dated 13.11.2019 will indicate that only certain documents have been referred to by the respondent No.1 and that the same has been duly replied to by the p....