M/S Tata Housing Development Company Limited vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
“(i) To issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the impugned Order-in-Original No.21-22/2021-22 (North)/(Pr.Commr) dated 11.02.2022 (vide Annexure-A) passed by the 1st Respondent as the same is in violation of natural justice, without application of mind, without juri iction and Arbitrary.
(ii) To issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the impugned Show Cause Notice SCN F.No.DGCEI/MZU/I&IS ‘B’/12(3)29/2015/4374 dated 04.09.2017 (vide Annexure-B) issued by the 2nd Respondent as the same is without juri iction and unsustainable in law.
(iii) To issue a writ of Certiorari to quash the impugned Show Cause Notice C No.V/15/04/2019-20 ND3 ADJ 531 SCN Sl.No.04/2019-20 dated 15.04.2019 (vide Annexure-C) issued by 3rd the Respondent as the same is without juri iction and unsustainable in Law.
(iv) To issue order(s), direction (s), writ(s) or any other relief(s) as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47223 the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.
(v) To award Costs of and incidental to this application be paid by the Respondents;
And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall, as in duty bound, every pray.”
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record.
A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the Service Tax Audit Commissioner issued a 1st Show Cause Notice (i.e., SCN-1) dated 17.06.2016 to the petitioner in relation to the tax period from October 2012 to June 2015, which was contested by the petitioner and ultimately culminated in an order dated 09.05.2025 in Service Tax Appeal No.21027/2018 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru (CESTAT) against the petitioner.
Meanwhile, the respondent No.2 issued one more Show Cause Notice (i.e., SCN-2) dated 04.09.2017 vide Annexure – B to the petitioner in relation to the tax period July 2012 to March 2015 to which the petitioner submitted his reply and the same culminated in the impugned order at Annexure – A dated HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47223
2022. So also, respondent No.3 issued one more Show Cause Notice (i.e., SCN-3) dated 15.04.2019 vide Annexure – C, which also culminated in the common order at Annexure – A dated 11.02.2022. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though the aforesaid Show Cause Notice dated 17.06.2016 which is the subject matter of the aforesaid order dated 09.05.2025 passed in Service Tax Appeal No.21027/2018 by the CESTAT, Bengaluru, the respondents No.2 and 3 have issued the impugned Show Cause Notice, which has culminated in the impugned order at Annexure – A in relation to the very same subject matter, which is impermissible in law since dual / parallel / simultaneous proceedings in relation to the very same subject matter are illegal and the same deserves to be quashed and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed. He would however not dispute that the subject matter of the proceedings before the CESTAT, Bengaluru and the subject matter of the impugned Show Cause Notice and the impugned order are one and the same. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47223
The said submission is placed on record.
In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the material on record which indicates that the CESTAT, Bengaluru, has passed an order in Service Tax Appeal No.21027/2017 on 09.05.2025 during pendency of the present petition, without expressing any opinion on the merits / demerits of the rival contentions, I deem it just and appropriate to allow and dispose of this petition by setting aside the impugned order at Annexure – A and remit the matter back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh bearing in mind the order of the CESTAT, Bengaluru.
In the result, I pass the following: ORDER
(i) The petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) The impugned Order-in-original At Annexure – A dated 11.02.2022 is hereby set aside.
(iii) The matter is remitted back to respondent No.1 for reconsideration afresh bearing in mind the order passed HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47223 in Service Tax Appeal No.21027/2017 on 09.05.2025 by the CESTAT, Bengaluru.
(iv) Petitioner is directed to appear before the 1st respondent on 15.12.2025 without awaiting further notice from the 1st respondent.
(v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit replies, documents etc., which shall be considered by the 1st respondent who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear them and proceed further in accordance with law and conclude the proceedings within a period of three months from 15.12.2025. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 21
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.