The Karnataka High Court Division Bench, presided over by Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru, has allowed a writ appeal filed by the Commercial Tax Officer and set aside the Single Judge’s order which had issued blanket directions for reimbursement of differential GST to a works contractor, holding that such directions cannot be issued without reference to the specific terms and conditions of the contracts and that no directions could be issued to tax authorities to act contrary to the terms of the relevant statutes. The ruling in Writ Appeal No. 652/2026 (Commercial Tax Officer (Enforcement-10), Mysuru v. Sri. Mahadevappa Madappa, decided 08.09.2026) effectively curtails the line of blanket orders that had been passed by the Single Judge in the batch decision of Chandrashekaraiah v. State of Karnataka (WP No. 9721/2019, decided 11.04.2023) and applied in subsequent cases.
The Chief Justice noted that the original batch petitions concerned claims arising from contracts entered into prior to or during the transition from the KVAT regime to the GST regime, but the blanket directions were issued without examining the individual contract terms, and directions were also issued to GST authorities to permit filing of revised returns and to not take precipitate steps — which amounted to directing tax authorities to act contrary to statute. The respondent-contractor’s counsel fairly stated that the respondent did not wish to contest the appeal. The impugned order was set aside. The delay of 268 days in filing the appeal was condoned.
- 2026-juristway.com-2531-HC(Karnataka)-GST | High Court of Karnataka | Writ Appeal No. 652/2026 | 08.09.2026