M/S.K.V Mohana Rao And Co. PVT.LTD. vs. Commissioner GST And Central Excise

WP(C)/8689/2018HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01026991201814 August 2026Bench: MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK,MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN7 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Held

The High Court noted that the matter was covered by the Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Customs v. M/s. Canon India Pvt. Ltd. The Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner eight weeks to prefer an appeal before the CESTAT.

Facts

The petitioner challenged an Order-in-Original passed by the Commissioner (Audit) GST and Central Excise. The petitioner argued that the order was passed without jurisdiction, contrary to tax principles for works contracts, and was hit by limitation.

Key Issues

Whether the Order-in-Original was passed without jurisdiction and was barred by limitation. The applicability of the Supreme Court's decision in Canon India Pvt. Ltd. to the present case.

Sections Cited

Section 73, Section 75, Section 78 (A) of the Finance Act, 1994

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

Page 1 of 7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P. (C) No.8689 of 2018 CNR No. ODHC010269912018 M/s. K.V. Mohana Rao & Co. (P) Ltd., Visakhapatnam …. Petitioner Represented by Adv.- Mr. Debendranath Panda and Mr. Anindya Kumar Mishra, Advocates -versus- Commissioner (Audit) GST & Central Excise, Bhubaneswar and others …. Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.- Mr. Bismay Anand Prusty, Senior Standing Counsel CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK AND HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No.

ORDER 14.08.2026 (Hybrid Mode)

08.

1. Challenging the Order-in-Original dated 25.01.2018 passed by the Commissioner (Audit) GST and Central Excise, Bhubaneswar (opposite party No.1) under Sections 73, 75 and 78 (A) of the Finance Act, 1994 for the tax periods 2011-12 to 2014-15, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

It is submitted by Mr. Debendranath Panda, learned Advocate that the adjudication Order-in-Original has been passed without jurisdiction, contrary to the principles of taxation in respect of works contract and sub-contracts. This apart, the impugned order i

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.