Sujoy Saumendra Bhowmik vs. The Principal Commissioner And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Sujoy Saumendra Bhowmik, filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging an Order-in-Original (OIO) bearing No. BEL-EXCUS-COM-MG-31-2023-24-ST dated August 18, 2023, passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise, GST Belagavi Commissionerate (Respondent No. 1). The petitioner sought to quash this order. The respondents are the Principal Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, and Superintendent of Central Tax. The procedural history relevant to the decision is that both parties agreed that the matter was covered by a previous decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of the same High Court.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition is partly allowed. The Court noted that both counsel submitted that the dispute was covered by a decision of a Co-ordinate Bench in M/s Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax in WP No.11154/2023. Based on this submission and the operative part of the cited order, the Court decided to set aside the impugned Order-in-Original. The matter was relegated to officers to be designated in terms of paragraphs 7 and 8 of the order in WP No.11154/2023. These designated officers are to reconsider the demand of the revenue and the reply of the assessee in accordance with the law within 90 days of receiving a copy of the current order. The ratio decidendi is that where a High Court's Co-ordinate Bench has laid down a principle for dealing with similar challenges to Orders-in-Original, subsequent similar matters should be decided in line with that precedent, often involving remand for reconsideration from an earlier stage.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Order-in-Original (OIO) bearing No. BEL-EXCUS-COM-MG-31-2023-24-ST dated 18.08.2023, passed by Respondent No.1, is liable to be quashed, in light of the decision in M/s Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax in WP No.11154/2023. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the lis in the present matter is covered by the decision of a Co-ordinate Bench of the High Court in M/s Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax in WP No.11154/2023 & connected matters dated 3.7.2024. They relied on the operative portion of this order which dealt with challenges to Orders-in-Original. Revenue's contention: The respondents, through their counsel, agreed that the lis in the present matter is covered by the aforementioned decision of the Co-ordinate Bench. They did not present any separate arguments against the petitioner's reliance on the precedent.
Sections Cited
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs;
a. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ to quash Order-in-Original (OIO) bearing No.BEL-EXCUS-COM-MG-31-2023-24-ST (DIN 2023 0857TC000052045B) dated 18.08.2023 (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.
Both the counsel submits that the lis in the present matter is covered by a decision of a Co-ordinate NC: 2024:KHC-K:6881 Bench of this Court in M/s Karnataka Chinmaya Tax in WP No.11154/2023 & connected matters dated 3.7.2024. The operative portion of the said order reads as under; 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. NC: 2024:KHC-K:6881 Wherever demands have been made pursuant to the impugned orders, such proceedings are also set aside.
In view of the submission made by both the counsel and the order passed in WP No.11154/2023 being applicable to the present matter also, I passed the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is partly allowed. ii. The petitioner is relegated to officers so designated in terms of para 7 and 8 of the order in WP No.11154/2023. iii. The said officers to consider the demand of the revenue and reply of the assessee in accordance with law, within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0
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.