Mr. Sairam Rai vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Mr. Sairam Rai, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka challenging an order bearing No. 82/2023-24/AC/ED-4 dated November 6, 2023, passed by the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Division-4, Bengaluru East GST Commissionerate. The petitioner sought to set aside this order, arguing it was passed without the authority of law. The petition also prayed for the matter to be remitted back to the authority to ascertain the rendition of taxable service in accordance with law. The respondents are the Union of India and various authorities under the Central Tax department.
Held
The High Court held that the issue in controversy was directly and squarely covered by a judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of the same 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. Following this precedent, the Court quashed the impugned order dated 06.11.2023 (Annexure-B). The Court further directed that the matter be relegated to the designated officers for reconsideration from the stage of the show-cause notice. The petitioner was granted liberty to file pleadings within a reasonable time fixed by the concerned officers. The ratio decidendi is that orders-in-original challenged in writ petitions should be set aside and matters remitted to the authorities for reconsideration from the stage of the show-cause notice, in line with the Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust judgment.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order bearing No. 82/2023-24/AC/ED-4 dated 6.11.2023, passed by the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, was issued without the authority of law, thereby warranting a writ of certiorari? 2. Whether the matter should be remitted back to the respondent no. 3 for reconsideration of the aspect of rendition of taxable service in accordance with law, thereby warranting a writ of mandamus? The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed without the authority of law and sought its quashing and remittance. The respondents, represented by their respective counsel, did not present specific arguments recorded in the judgment, but the court noted that "several contentions have been urged by both sides". The judgment indicates that the core issue was the validity of the order and the subsequent proceedings.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the judgment text provided, other than general reference to tax authorities and orders.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER BEARING NO.82/2023-24/AC/ED-4 WITH DIN- 20231157000000222F9E DATED 6.11.2023 ENCLOSED AS ANNEXURE – B AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs; "a. Issue a writ of certiorari, or a writ or order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari and set aside the impugned order bearing No.82/2023-24/AC/ED-4 with DIN 20231157000000222F9E dated 6.11.2023 enclosed as Annexure B. b. Issue a writ of certiorari, or a writ or order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari and to hold that the impugned order bearing No.82/2023-24/AC/ED- 4 with DIN 20231157000000222F9E dated 6.11.2023 NC: 2024:KHC:32937 enclosed as Annexure B, were passed without the authority of law. c. Issue a writ of mandamus, or a writ or order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus by setting aside impugned order bearing No.82/2023-24/AC/ED-4 with DIN 20231157000000222F9E dated 6.11.2023 enclosed as Annexure B, and remitting the matter back to Respondent no. 3 to ascertain specifically the aspect of rendition of taxable service in accordance with law; d. Issue any other direction or grant any other relief, as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of this case, in the interest of Justice. e. Issue a direction to provide for the cost of this petition."
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 NC: 2024:KHC:32937 & 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. 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 NC: 2024:KHC:32937 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.
Accordingly, the impugned order at Annexure-B dated 06.11.2023 is hereby quashed.
Ordered accordingly. (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE PN CT: SN 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.