Shri Eregowda vs. The Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Shri Eregowda, proprietor of Karunadu Tour and Travels, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging two orders. The first impugned order, dated December 6, 2019, was passed by the Additional Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise (Respondent No. 1). The second impugned order, dated April 12, 2022, was an appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Central Tax (Appeals) (Respondent No. 2). The petitioner sought to set aside these orders and prevent the recovery of alleged service tax due. The petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Held
The High Court held that the present writ petition was squarely covered by the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench in M/s. Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust Vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax. Following this precedent, the Court quashed the impugned Order-in-Original dated December 6, 2019 (Annexure-A) and the Order dated April 12, 2022 (Annexure-B). The Court's decision was based on the principle that matters challenging Orders-in-Original should be relegated to designated officers for reconsideration from the stage of the show-cause notice. The Court directed that the impugned orders be set aside, and any recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to these orders were also set aside. The petitioner was granted liberty to file pleadings within a reasonable time fixed by the concerned officers.
Key Issues
The primary issue before the Court was whether the impugned orders passed by the revenue authorities, specifically the Order-in-Original and the subsequent Order-in-Appeal, were valid and sustainable. The petitioner sought to set aside these orders and prevent the recovery of alleged service tax. The Court noted that while several contentions were urged by both sides, the issue was directly covered by a judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of the same Court in M/s. Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust Vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax. The Court had to decide whether to follow the precedent set by the Co-ordinate Bench. The revenue authorities did not present any specific arguments in the provided text, but their orders were under challenge.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the judgment text provided, beyond general reference to service tax and orders.
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 Writ of Certiorari or directions in the nature of Certiorari, to set aside the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent bearing No. C. No. V/ST/15/12/2019 Hqrs Adj./3782/19 and OIO.No.MYS- EXCUS-000- JADC-YCS-12-12-2019-20 dated 06.12.2019 vide Annexure "A"
b) Issue Writ of Certiorari or directions in the nature of Certiorari, to set aside the impunged appellate order passed by the 2nd respondent bearing DIN- 20220457CV000000A561 and Order-IN-Appeal NO.MYS-EXCUS-000-APP-SAK-2022-23 dated 12.04.2022 vide Annexure "B'.
c) Issue Writ of Mandamus or directions in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent authorities not NC: 2024:KHC:32969 to proceed with the recovery of the alleged service tax due as per the impugned orders."
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
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 Trust Vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax in WP No.11154/2023 & connected matters dated 03.07.2024, wherein it was held as under; "
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. NC: 2024:KHC:32969 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."
Under these circumstances, the present petition is also disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. NC: 2024:KHC:32969
Accordingly, the impugned Order-in-Original at Annexure-A dated 06.12.2019 and the Order dated 12.04.2022 at Annexure-B are hereby quashed.
Ordered accordingly. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
RB
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.