M/S K K Enterprises vs. The Addl/Joint Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, M/s K K Enterprises, M/s Vision Manpower Private Limited, and M/s A.K. Enterprises, filed writ petitions before the Karnataka High Court. These petitions challenged 'Defect Memos' issued by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT insisted on a pre-deposit of 7.5% or 10% of the service tax amount for admitting their appeals against orders passed by the adjudicating authorities. The petitioners sought a writ of mandamus to direct the CESTAT to hear their appeals on merits without insisting on this pre-deposit. The underlying issue in related matters involved whether solid waste disposal for BBMP was covered under Service Tax Notification No. 25/2012 dated June 20, 2012.
Held
The Court noted that the petitioners had filed memos seeking to withdraw their respective writ petitions. These memos indicated that a Single Judge of the High Court had previously stayed show cause notices in identical matters and ordered that no precipitative action be taken. Furthermore, in related matters, adjudication orders had been set aside and relegated, permitting petitioners to raise their contentions. Consequently, in light of the petitioners' request to withdraw their petitions and appeals before the CESTAT, with liberty to challenge adjudication orders before the Single Judge, the Court disposed of the writ petitions as withdrawn. The issue of whether solid waste disposal for BBMP was covered under the specified service tax notification, and the propriety of the CESTAT's pre-deposit requirement, were not decided on merits in these disposed petitions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CESTAT was justified in insisting on a pre-deposit of a percentage of the service tax amount before admitting the appeals filed by the petitioners, thereby preventing the appeals from being heard on merits? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners argued that the CESTAT's insistence on pre-deposit was a procedural hurdle preventing them from having their appeals heard on merits. They sought to withdraw their writ petitions and appeals before CESTAT, with liberty to challenge adjudication orders before the Single Judge of the High Court, citing a previous order by a Single Judge in identical matters (WP No. 4495/2020 and 9522/2021) which stayed show cause notices and ordered no precipitative action. They also noted that in similar cases, adjudication orders were set aside and matters were relegated for petitioners to raise contentions. Revenue's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state respondents.
Sections Cited
Service Tax notification No.25/2012
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT)
IN WP NO.21213/2022: Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a Memo dated 16.04.2025 seeking leave to withdraw the Writ Petition, which reads as under: “The Petitioner above named most respectfully submits as follows:
The present writ petition has been filed before this Hon’ble Court Challenging Defect Memo bearing No.ST/DEFECT/207122022 DATED 26.09.2022 (ANNEXURE-F) issued by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) requiring it to pre-deposit 7.5% of the service tax amount in respect of appeal filed before the Hon’ble CESTAT challenging the adjudicating authority.
The Petitioner further submits that this Hon’ble Court, after noting that the Ld. Single Judge of the High Court had stayed show cause notices in identical matters in that no precipitative action shall be taken in the matter pending disposal of the writ petition.
The Petitioner submits that the involving identical issue i.e., whether solid waste disposal undertaken for BBMP is covered vide Sl.No.25 of Service Tax notification disposed of by the Ld. Single Judge of the NC: 2025:KHC:16669-DB Hon’ble High Court vide order dated in 20th other writ petitions with directions to the petitioners to raise all contentions before the adjudicating authority in respect of show cause notices pending adjudication.
Further, in respect of adjudication orders already passed by the authorities, such orders have been set aside and the matters have been relegated permitting the petitioners to take to contentions raised in the petitions filed before this Hon’ble Court.
WHEREFORE, in view of the above, the Petitioners craves the leave of this Hon’ble Court to withdraw the above petition as well as the appeal filed before Hon’ble CESTAT along with liberty to challenge the adjudication order before the Ld. Single Judge of this Hon’ble Court seeking appropriate reliefs.”
IN WP NO.20054/2021: Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a Memo dated 16.04.2025 seeking leave to withdraw the Writ Petition, which reads as under: “The Petitioner above named most respectfully submits as follows:
The present writ petition has been filed before this Hon’ble Court Challenging Defect Memo bearing DIARY NO.DEFECT/207182021 (ANNEXURE-E) issued by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) requiring it to pre-deposit 7.5% of the service NC: 2025:KHC:16669-DB tax amount in respect of appeal filed before the Hon’ble CESTAT challenging the adjudicating authority.
The Petitioner further submits that this Hon’ble Court, after noting that the Ld. Single Judge of the High Court had stayed show cause notices in identical matters in that no precipitative action shall be taken in the matter pending disposal of the writ petition.
The Petitioner submits that the involving identical issue i.e., whether solid waste disposal undertaken for BBMP is covered vide Sl.No.25 of Service Tax notification disposed of by the Ld. Single Judge of the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated in 20th other writ petitions with directions to the petitioners to raise all contentions before the adjudicating authority in respect of show cause notices pending adjudication.
Further, in respect of adjudication orders already passed by the authorities, such orders have been set aside and the matters have been relegated permitting the petitioners to take to contentions raised in the petitions filed before this Hon’ble Court.
WHEREFORE, in view of the above, the Petitioner craves the leave of this Hon’ble Court to withdraw the above petition as well as the appeal filed before Hon’ble CESTAT along with liberty to challenge the adjudication order NC: 2025:KHC:16669-DB before the Ld. Single Judge of this Hon’ble Court seeking appropriate reliefs.”
IN WP NO.3529/2022: Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a Memo dated 16.04.2025 seeking leave to withdraw the Writ Petition, which reads as under: “The Petitioner above named most respectfully submits as follows:
The present writ petition has been filed before this Hon’ble Court challenging Defect Memo bearing DIARY NO.DEFECT/209512021 (ANNEXURE-E) issued by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) requiring it to pre-deposit 7.5% of the service tax amount in respect of appeal filed before the Hon’ble CESTAT challenging the adjudicating authority.
The Petitioner further submits that this Hon’ble Court, after noting that the Ld. Single Judge of the High Court had stayed show cause notices in identical matters in that no precipitative action shall be taken in the matter pending disposal of the writ petition.
The Petitioner submits that the involving identical issue i.e., whether solid waste disposal undertaken for BBMP is covered vide Sl.No.25 of Service Tax notification disposed of by the Ld. Single Judge of the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated in 20th NC: 2025:KHC:16669-DB other writ petitions with directions to the petitioners to raise all contentions before the adjudicating authority in respect of show cause notices pending adjudication.
Further, in respect of adjudication orders already passed by the authorities, such orders have been set aside and the matters have been relegated permitting the petitioners to take to contentions raised in the petitions filed before this Hon’ble Court.
WHEREFORE, in view of the above, the Petitioner craves the leave of this Hon’ble Court to withdraw the above petition as well as the appeal filed before Hon’ble CESTAT along with liberty to challenge the adjudication order before the Ld. Single Judge of this Hon’ble Court seeking appropriate reliefs.”
In view of the above, these Writ Petitions are disposed off as withdrawn, costs having been made easy. (KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE cbc List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3
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.