M/S Rooman Technologies PVT LTD vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
Petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayers: "(i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned show cause notice No. 113/2024-25 dated 6.8.2024 issued by the first respondent for the tax period April 2020 to March 2021 vide ANNEXURE B;
(ii) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order-in-original Order In Original No. 165/2024-25-WD-2 dated 24.1.2025 issued by the first Respondent for the period 2020-21 vide ANNEXURE E;
(iii) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order under section 73 vide Reference No. ZD2901251016340 along with the summary of the order both dated 27.1.2025 for the tax period April 2020 to March 2021 issued by the first Respondent collectively marked as ANNEXURE F;
(iv) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the consequent recovery notice bearing DIN 20250757YU000000B661 dated 24.7.2025 issued by the first respondent for the period 2020-21 vide ANNEXURE G;
(v) Issue a writ of Mandamus or a direction in the nature of mandamus directing the first respondent to adjudicate the show cause notice No. 113/2024-25 dated 6.8.2024 for the tax period April 2020 to March 2021 vide ANNEXURE B after affording reasonable opportunity to petitioner and HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33380 (vi) To pass such other orders or directions as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice and equity."
Heard Miss Vani H, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Aravind V Chavan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents and have perused the material on record.
The petitioner is said to be a registered tax payer engaged in providing business of information technology services, manpower supply services and training services with reference to skill development. The respondent No.2 initiates adjudicating proceedings on 06.08.2024 by issuance of a Show Cause Notice under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the period between July 2017 to March 2023. The petitioner participates in the proceedings and an Order-in-Original is passed demanding huge amount of money. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority after depositing the amounts. During the subsistence of the appeal, the respondent No.1 issues a notice for the year 2020-21, proposing fresh adjudication. This notice is not served upon the petitioner, is the averment in the petition. Therefore, the petitioner did not furnish any reply to the said Show Cause HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33380 Notice but a personal hearing notice is said to have been issued on 4.12.2024. The petitioner appears before the respondent No.1 and submits about the pending proceedings before the respondent No.2 and requested the respondent No.1 to await the conclusion of the proceedings filed before the Appellate Authority. The respondent No.1 refuses to hold its hands and proceeds to pass the impugned order without hearing the petitioner and without appropriate opportunity to defend. The Order-in-Original is also averred in the petition that it is not served upon the petitioner. A recovery notice then springs on 24.07.2025. It is the case of the petitioner that it is then, the petitioner gets knowledge about the original proceedings. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner would reiterate the grounds in the petition.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would though defend the action, is not in a position to dispute the fact that certain proceedings which led to the impugned demand is pursuant to a proceeding in which the petitioner was not heard. In the light of the said twin circumstance, one the Appellate Authority still considering the appeal for the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33380 assessment year 2017 to 2023 and the impugned proceeding being in violation of the principles of natural justice.
In the light of the said circumstance, the matter requires to be remitted back to the hands of respondent No.1 to hear the petition and pass necessary orders.
In that light, the following:
O R D E R
[i] The writ petition is allowed.
[ii] Impugned order in Original No.165/2024-25-WD-2 dated 24.1.2025 issued by the first respondent for the period 2020-21 vide Annexure–E, stand quashed.
[iii] Impugned order under Section 73 vide Reference No.ZD2901251016340 along with the summary of the order both dated 27.1.2025 for the tax period April 2020 to March 2021 issued by the first respondent collectively marked vide Annexure-F, stand quashed. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33380 [iv] Recovery notice bearing DIN 20250757YU000000B661 dated 24.07.2025 issued by the first respondent for the period 2020-21 vide Annexure-G, stand quashed.
[v] The matter is remitted back to the hands of the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax - respondent No.1 herein to hear the petitioner and pass necessary orders in accordance with law.
Ordered accordingly. (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE
CBC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 142
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.