M/S Infocon International Limited vs. The Principal Commissioner
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Infocon International Limited, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an Order-in-Original No. 52/2023-24 dated March 19, 2024, passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, GST West Commissionerate. The petitioner sought a direction to declare the said order as void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of the principles of natural justice, as well as Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner also prayed for the consequential setting aside of the impugned order. The respondents were the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax and the Union of India.
Held
The Court held that the issue in controversy was directly and squarely covered by the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of the same 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 July 3, 2024. Following the precedent set in that case, the Court ordered that the Orders-in-Original challenged in writ petitions would stand set aside and the matters would be relegated to the designated officers for reconsideration from the stage of the show-cause notice. The petitioners were granted liberty to file their pleadings within a reasonable time fixed by the officers. Demands made pursuant to the impugned orders were also set aside. The Court expressly did not leave any issue undecided, as it directly applied the ratio of the prior judgment.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned Order-in-Original No. 52/2023-24 dated March 19, 2024, passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, is void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India? The petitioner contended that the order was void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of the principles of natural justice and specific constitutional provisions. The respondents, represented by their respective counsels, presented their arguments in support of their claims. The judgment does not explicitly detail the specific arguments made by each side beyond the general claims presented by the petitioner.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the provided text, but the context implies provisions related to the issuance of Orders-in-Original and the challenge thereto under GST law.
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 Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction declaring the impugned Order-in-Original No.52/2023-24 (Pr.COMMR) dated 19.03.2024 vide Annexure-A passed by the 1st Respondent as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without juri iction, violative of the principles of natural justice apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India, and to consequently set aside the same. (ii) Pass any other or further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the NC: 2025:KHC:15972 circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.”
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents 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 observations made in para 8 above, at the same NC: 2025:KHC:15972 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:15972
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 – A dated 19.03.2024 is hereby quashed.
Ordered accordingly. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
MPK CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56
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.