Madhusudhan Sheshagiri Konegutta vs. The Prinicipal Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Madhusudhan Sheshagiri Konegutta, filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging an order dated 23.09.2022, bearing DIN No. 20220957YU000081895E, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax, Bengaluru West Commissionerate (Respondent No. 2). The petitioner sought to quash this order and prevent any coercive steps. The respondents are various authorities under the Central Tax, Bengaluru West Commissionerate. The petition was heard for preliminary hearing, and both parties presented their arguments.
Held
The Court held that the issue in controversy was directly and squarely covered by the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of the Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s. Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust Vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax in WP No.11154/2023 & connected matters dated 03.07.2024. Following this precedent, the Court set aside the impugned Order-in-Original dated 23.09.2022 (Annexure-B). The matter was remitted back for reconsideration to the stage of the show cause notice dated 15.04.2021. The petitioners were granted liberty to file their pleadings within a reasonable time fixed by the designated officers. The Court also noted that if matters were pending in appeal, petitioners were to file a memo for withdrawal of appeal, and the corresponding orders-in-original would also be set aside. Demands made pursuant to impugned orders were also set aside.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 23.09.2022, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (Respondent No. 2), is liable to be quashed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner contended that the impugned order should be quashed and that no coercive steps should be taken against them. The petitioner sought relief in the form of a Writ of Certiorari and a Writ of Prohibition. The respondents, represented by Smt. Jyoti M. Maradi, Advocate, presented their arguments in opposition to the petitioner's claims. The judgment notes that several contentions were urged by both sides, but it specifically highlights that the issue in controversy is directly covered by a previous judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of the same High Court.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the provided text, beyond general constitutional articles.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: "(i) issue a Writ of Certiorari or in the like nature of writ, quashing the impugned order dated 23.09.2022, issued by Respondent No.2 bearing DIN No.:20220957YU000081895E, passed against the petitioner, vide ANNEXURE - B;
(ii) issue a Writ of Prohibition or any other writ of like nature, directing the respondent not to proceed with coercive steps by way of any proceedings of whatsoever in nature, in respect of the impugned order dated 23.09.2022 vide ANNEXURE - B. NC: 2025:KHC:17453 (iii) pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity."
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.
Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, the issue in controversy between the parties is directly and squarely covered by the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of M/s.Karnataka Chinmaya Seva No.11154/2023 & connected matters dated 03.07.2024, wherein it was held as under; "
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 NC: 2025:KHC:17453 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- 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." NC: 2025:KHC:17453
Under these circumstances, the present petition is also disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
Accordingly, the impugned Order-in-original at Annexure – B dated 23.09.2022 is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back for reconsideration to the stage of show cause notice dated 15.04.2021. Ordered accordingly. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24 CT: BHK
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.