IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 13213 OF 2020 (T-RES)

BETWEEN:

M/S SANCHETI GLOBAL INC., A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO. G/46, MEI ROAD, 2ND STAGE INDUSTIRAL SUBURB, YESHWANTHPUR, BANGLURU-560022 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SHRI. S M HEM PRAKASH.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. S. M. HEM PRAKASH, PARTY IN PERSON)

AND:

1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS REVENUE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Digitally signed MINISTRY OF FINANCE by VIJAYA P

128-A/NORTH BLOCK Location:

HIGH COURT NEW DELHI-110 001.

OF KARNATAKA

2. GOODS AND SERVICES TAX COUNCIL OFFICE OF THE GSTC THROUGH IT SECRETARY TOWER - II, 5TH FLOOR JEEVAN BHARTI BUILDING NEW DELHI-110 001.

3. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX AUDIT - II, COMMISSIONERATE JSS TOWERS, 100 FEET RING ROAD BANASHANKARI III STAGE BANGALURU-560 085.

4. SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX MG-2, CIRCLE II, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX AUDIT II, COMMISSIONERATE JSS TOWERS, 100 FEET RING ROAD BANASHANKARI III STAGE BANGALURU-560 085.

5. SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX EMWDI RANGE NORTH WEST DIVISION NORTH WEST COMMISSIONERATE

2ND FLOOR, SUTH WING BMTC COMPLEX, SHIVAJINAGAR BANGALURU - 560 051.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MADANAN PILLAI, CGC FOR R1 AND R2;

SRI. JEEVAN J NEERALGI, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT AGAINST THE RESPONDENT BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED SERIAL NO.9(ii) OF NOTIFICATION NO. 8/2017-INTERGRATED TAX (RATE), DATED 28.06.2017 ANNEXURE-A ISSUED BY R-1 CORRIGENDUM DTD.30.06.2017 (ANENXURE-B) ISSUED BY R- 1 AND SERIAL NO.1O OF NOTIFICATION DTD.28.06.2017 ANNEXURE-C ISSUED BY THE R-1 BY DECLARING THAT SAME LACKING LEGISLATIVE COMPETENCY, ULTRA VIRES TO THE INTEGRATED GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT 2017 AND HENCE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

ORAL ORDER

Petitioner has sought for setting aside of Sl.No.9(ii)

of Notification No.8/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 at Annexure A, as well as the Corrigendum dated 30.06.2017 at Annexure B and Sl.No.10 of the Notification No. 10/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 at Annexure C issued by respondent No. 1 by declaring that the same are ultra vires to Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and unconstitutional. Consequently, the petitioner has sought for setting aside of the show cause notice at Annexure-D.

2. The facts made out are that the petitioner is an importer and has called in question the levy on the basis of reverse charge mechanism by virtue of the impugned notifications. Petitioner submits that the identical legal issue has already been adjudicated upon and decided in the case of Union of India v. Mohith Minerals Pvt. Ltd. - 2022 (61) GSTL 257 (SC) and in light of the notifications impugned herein already having been set aside by the Apex Court, petition may be allowed.

3. The said legal position is not controverted by the other side.

4. It is to be noticed that the subject matter of the dispute is encapsulated by the Apex Court in the case of Mohith Minerals (supra) at Paragraph No.6 which reads as follows:

"6. The respondent filed a writ petition before the Gujarat High Court challenging Notification No. 8 of 2017 and Notification No. 10 of 2017 (collectively referred as “impugned notifications”) on the grounds that: (i) the notifications are ultra vires the IGST Act and the CGST Act; (ii) Customs duty is levied on the component of ocean freight and the levy of IGST on the freight element in the course of transportation would amount to double taxation; (iii) though in the case of high sea sales, the importer is a different entity yet this regime would tax the respondent as the importer and the recipient of service; (iv) in the case of a CIF contract, the supply of service of transport of goods