Sri Ramachandra Gouda vs. The Assistant Commissioner
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)
The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: I. Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the show cause notice SL.No.146/2021-22, DIN2021105Y Z000000200C, dated 18/10/2021 issued by Respondent No.1 is enclosed and marked as Annexure-E.
II. Issue a writ of Certiorari quashing the Order in Original date of passing and issued on 10/10/2023 vide order-in-original Sl.No.MLR-EX-CUS-000-DUK- ASC-RG-45-23-24, din. 20231057 yz0000807320/571 passed by respondent no.1 is enclosed and marked as Annexure-G.
III. Issue a writ of Certiorari quashing the Order- in-Appeal, date 30-04-2024 and issued on 01-05-2024 vide order- in-appeal no.MLR-EXCUS-000-APP-AS-08-2024-25, file no.A.No.06/ 2024 / MR/ ST, passed by respondent no.2 is enclosed and marked as Annexure-J.
IV.And pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17593
Heard Sri Shashank S Hegde, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Girish Hulmani, learned counsel for respondents.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue in the lis stands answered by the judgment rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/S COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, in W.P.No.11154/2023 AND CONNECTED MATTERS, disposed on 03.07.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents would not dispute the position of law, except the fact that the matter should be remitted to the stage of the submission of reply to the show cause notice by the petitioner.
The Co-ordinate Bench in the aforesaid W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected matters, considering the entire spectrum of the law and issue, passed the following order:
“10. The officers while disposing off the petitions to keep in mind the following:
1) Whether petitioners do not qualify under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994 ? 2) Whether services are covered under negative list? HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17593
3) Whether services are covered under the exemption list under the Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 28.06.2012 or under any other applicable Notifications? 4) Whether the person is liable to remit service tax in terms of Rule 2 (1) (d) read with applicable notification? 5) Whether claims are barred by limitation in terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court ?
It is also clarified that disposal of present petitions must not be construed as having adjudicated any of the contentions including juri iction. All contentions of both sides on merits are kept open.
Needless to state, upon conclusion of proceedings, if any of the petitioners are still aggrieved, legal remedies are kept open. It is also clarified that wherever, replies to show-cause notice have not been made out, the same may be filed upon matter being relegated as noticed above.
Accordingly, the following: ORDER In light of observations made above, the writ petitions relating to challenge to show-cause notice, such matters will stand relegated to the officers to be designated in terms of the observations made in para 8 above, at the same stage. Accordingly, such of the petitions at Sl.No.1 to 5 in Column No.1 of the table relating to challenge to show- cause notice are disposed off. Insofar as such writ petitions as detailed in Column 2 of the table relating to challenge to Orders-in-Original, in light of the discussion made above, the Orders-in-Original stand set aside and the matters are relegated to the Officers to be designated to be reconsidered from the stage of show-cause notice. Accordingly, such of the petitions at Sl.No.1 to 35 in Column No.2 of the table relating to challenge to Orders-in-Original are disposed off. The petitioners who are now relegated before the authorities concerned are at liberty to file their pleadings within a reasonable time as may be fixed by the Officers concerned. Wherever the matters are pending in appeal in light of the arrangement that is made, petitioners to file a memo for withdrawal of appeal and accordingly, the orders- HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17593 in-original in question would also receive the same treatment, i.e. be set aside as per the directions made above. Wherever demands have been made pursuant to the impugned orders, such proceedings are also set aside.”
In the light of the afore-quoted judgment of the Co- ordinate Bench and that the fact the petitioner is similarly placed, I deem it appropriate to remit the matter back to respondent No.1 – Authority.
For the aforesaid reasons, the following: ORDER a. The writ petition is disposed and remitted back to respondent No.1 - Authority. b. The impugned order in original dated 10.10.2023, at Annexure ‘G’ stands quashed. c. The impugned order in appeal dated 30.04.2024, at Annexure ‘J’ stands quashed. d. The petitioner shall now submit his reply to the show cause notice dated 18.10.2021, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. e. Respondent No.1 shall, from the stage of submitting reply to the show cause notice by the petitioner, consider the same and pass necessary orders in HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:17593 accordance with law, bearing in mind the afore-quoted judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench. f. It is open to the Authority to regulate its procedure and take the issue to its logical conclusion. Ordered accordingly. (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE
KGK/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 212
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.