BharatTaxGST

M/S Paramanna Police Patil Civil Work vs. The Commisisoner Of Central Tax

Original PDF →
WP/200796/2025HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC03003742202522 March 2025Bench: ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI DEVI PRASAD GANPATRAO, ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI GIRISH S. HULIMANI, ADVOCATE

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1861 WP No. 200796 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO. 200796 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S. PARAMANNA POLICE PATIL CIVIL WORK (A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISION OF GST ACT, 2017) BOODHIHAL, SHORAPUR, YADGIR - 585 237. (REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI PARAMANNA NANDANAGOUDA POLICE PATIL S/O. NANDAN GOUDA POLICE PATIL AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS) …PETITIONER (BY SRI DEVI PRASAD GANPATRAO, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE, NO.71, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI - 570 001. 2. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE, NO.71, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI - 570 001. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE, YADGIR RANGE, H.NO.5-1-41/8 HASNAIN MANZIL, Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1861 WP No. 200796 of 2025 OPP: OMAR FAROOQ MASJID, MILLAT NAGAR, YADGIR - 585 202. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GIRISH S. HULIMANI, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR SUCH OTHER WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT AND QUASH THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE IN SCN SL.NO.225/2021 ST(COMM) DATED 21.04.2021 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 AT ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the issue raised in the present writ petition is covered in terms of the two orders of this Court in Writ Petition Nos.201160/2024 and 201611/2024 marked as Annexures - D1 and D2. NC: 2025:KHC-K:1861

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that the issue raised in this petition is covered in terms of the orders passed in the aforementioned orders.

4.

It is also noticed that the aforementioned petitions are allowed by following the judgments of the co-ordinate bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.11154/2023 and connected matters has observed as under: “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.Nos.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. NC: 2025:KHC-K:1861 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.”

5.

Hence the following: ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed-in-part. (ii) The above matter is relegated to the officers to be designated in terms of the observation made in paragraph No.8 of the order dated 03.07.2024 in the case of M/s Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax and Another in W.P.No.11154/2023 and other connected matters. (iii) The petitioner is permitted to file his reply to the show cause notice, which shall be considered by the said NC: 2025:KHC-K:1861 officers in accordance with law within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (iv) Since the order is set-aside, the consequent order at Annexure C dated 24.02.2025 is quashed. (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

BRN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 41

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.