Shri.Narayanan Subramanya Raju vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Shri. Narayanan Subramanya Raju, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an Order in Appeal dated 28.11.2024 (Order No. 475/2023 A-I) passed by the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I) (Respondent No. 2). This appeal order was served on the petitioner on 18.12.2024. The petitioner also challenged the Order in Original dated 14.06.2023 (Order No. 13/2023-24-SD2) passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax (Respondent No. 1). The writ petition sought to set aside both these orders.
Held
The High Court held that the issue in controversy was directly and squarely covered by the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench 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 quashed the impugned Order in Original dated 14.06.2023 (Annexure-B). The judgment in the cited case directed that Orders-in-Original challenged in writ petitions should be set aside and the matters relegated to the designated officers to be reconsidered from the stage of the show-cause notice. Consequently, the present petition was also disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment, leading to the quashing of the Order in Original.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Order in Original dated 14.06.2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, is liable to be set aside? 2. Whether the Order in Appeal dated 28.11.2024, passed by the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I), is liable to be set aside? The petitioner argued for the setting aside of both the Order in Original and the Order in Appeal. The respondents, represented by their counsel, also presented their arguments. The Court noted that the issue in controversy was 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 as being discussed or forming the basis of the decision, beyond the general reference to the challenge of Orders-in-Original and show-cause notices.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: SHRI.NARAYANAN SUBRAMANYA RAJU
NO. 475/2023 A-I/3224/24 DTD 28.11.2024 IS ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNX-A.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: i) Invoking the extra-ordinary juri iction of this Hon'ble High Court challenging the set aside Order in Appeal dated 28.11.2024 vide Order No.475/2023 A-I/ 13224/24 passed by Respondent No.2 i.e., the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-I) served on the petitioner on 18.12.2024. Copy of the Order in Appeal vide Order No.475/2023 A-I/13224/2024 dated 28.11.2024 is enclosed and marked as Annexure-A. ii) Invoking the extra-ordinary juri iction of this Hon'ble High Court challenging to set NC: 2025:KHC:13159 aside the Order in Original dated 14.06.2023 vide Order in Original No.13/2023-24- 2 passed by the Respondent No.
Copy of the order in original is enclosed and marked as Annexure-B. iii) And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.”
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; NC: 2025:KHC:13159 "
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 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. NC: 2025:KHC:13159 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."
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 14.06.2023 is hereby quashed.
Ordered accordingly. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE NS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31
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.