Sri Gajendra Tourist vs. The Joint Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sri Gajendra Tourist, represented by its proprietor, filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging an Order-In-Original (OIO) bearing No. BLR-SOUTH/JC/25/2022-23, dated 29.09.2022, passed by the Joint Commissioner of Central Tax (Respondent No. 1). The petitioner sought to quash this OIO. The respondents are the Joint Commissioner of Central Tax, the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals-1), and the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax. The writ petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Held
The Court held that the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench in M/s. Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust. The Co-ordinate Bench's order directed that Orders-in-Original challenging which writ petitions were filed would stand set aside. The matters were to be relegated to the designated officers to be reconsidered from the stage of the show-cause notice. Petitioners were granted liberty to file their pleadings within a reasonable time fixed by the officers. Where demands were made pursuant to the impugned orders, such proceedings were also set aside. Consequently, the impugned Order-In-Original dated 29.09.2022 passed by respondent No.1 was quashed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned Order-In-Original (OIO) bearing No. BLR-SOUTH/JC/25/2022-23 dated 29.09.2022, passed by the Joint Commissioner of Central Tax, is liable to be quashed. The petitioner argued for the quashing of the OIO. The respondents, represented by their counsel, did not present specific arguments in the judgment but were represented. The Court noted that the issue was squarely covered by a previous judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of the same 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.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the provided text, other than general reference to writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
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: “a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ/to quash impugned Order-In-Original (OIO) bearing No. BLR-SOUTH/JC/25/2022-23 (DIN 2022 0957 0000 0000 B6C07) dated. 29.09.2022 (Annexure-A) passed by Respondent No.1. b) Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit in the facts and 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. Central Tax in WP No.11154/2023 & connected matters dated 03.07.2024, wherein it was held as under; NC: 2024:KHC:40844 "
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. 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: 2024:KHC:40844
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 at Annexure-A dated 29.09.2022 passed by respondent No.1 is hereby quashed.
Ordered accordingly. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
MDS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7
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.