M/S Infinity Access Technology PVT LTD. vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Infinity Access Technology Pvt Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging an order dated 05/07/2023, bearing DIN and Order No. 20230757000000166310, Order in Original 187/2022-2023. This order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax (Respondent No. 1) under Sections 65B(44) and 65B(51) of the Finance Act, 1994, concerning the assessment year 2015-16. The petitioner sought to quash this order and prevent the implementation of the demand, interest, and penalty. They also sought directions for de novo proceedings without pre-deposit. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes.
Held
The Court held that the issue in controversy was directly and squarely covered by the judgment of a co-ordinate bench in M/s. Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust Vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax. In that case, writ petitions challenging Orders-in-Original were set aside, and the matters were relegated to designated officers to be reconsidered from the stage of the show-cause notice. The court directed that the impugned order at Annexure-B dated 05.07.2023 be quashed. The petitioner was at liberty to file pleadings within a reasonable time fixed by the concerned officers. Any demands made pursuant to the impugned orders were also set aside. The court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 05/07/2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax under Sections 65B(44) and 65B(51) of the Finance Act, 1994, for the assessment year 2015-16, is liable to be quashed. The petitioner contended that the order should be quashed and proceedings should be conducted de novo without demanding pre-deposit. The respondents did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. The court's decision was based on a co-ordinate bench's prior ruling.
Sections Cited
Section 65B(44), Section 65B(51)
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 of Certiorari or in the like nature of quashing the impugned order dated 05/07/2023, bearing DIN and Order No. 20230757000000166310, order in original 187/2022-2023 passed u/s 65b (44) r.w.s. 65b (51) of Finance Act, 1994, in respect of the relevant assessment year 2015-16, vide ANNEXURE B, passed by the respondent no.1 and thereby not to implement the demand along-with interest and penalty authority;
B. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or in the like nature of direction, directing the respondent authorities to refrain from initiating any kind of proceedings, with respect to the impugned order dated 05/07/2023, bearing DIN and Order No. 20230757000000166310, order in original NC: 2024:KHC:39504 187/2022-2023 passed u/s 65b(44) r.w.s. 65b(51) of Finance Act, 1994, in respect of the relevant assessment year 2015-16, vide ANNEXURE - B, passed by the respondent no.1 authority,
C. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or in the like nature of Mandamus, directing the juri ictional officer (Respondent no.1 and 2) to conduct the subsequent proceeding as de novo refraining to raise any demand of pre-deposit in any of the proceeding;
D. Issue any other writ, order or direction in favour of the Petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper 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:39504 "
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:39504
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-B dated 05.07.02023 is hereby quashed.
Ordered accordingly. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
MDS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15
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.