Sri Basaveshvara Tours And Travels vs. The Commissioner Of Central Tax

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

In addition to reiterating various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, the learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the reply dated 19.02.2021 at Annexure-B NC: 2024:KHC:7049 submitted by the petitioner to the notice dated 12.02.2021 at Annexure-A issued by the second respondent in order to point out that despite submission of the said reply by the petitioner contending that the petitioner was exempted from payment of service tax and in the light of the Mega Exemption Notification No.25/2012 dated 20.06.2012 which applied to the petitioner who was providing service of transportation to students, faculty and staff, the third respondent has neither adverted to nor considered the said reply nor given an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and has proceeded to pass the impugned order which is without juri iction or authority of law and violative of principle of natural justice warranting interference by this Court in the present petition. My attention is also invited to the subsequent order dated 21.07.2022 passed by the fourth respondent in relation to the very same petitioner - assessee for the assessment year 2016-17, wherein the fourth respondent has come to the correct conclusion that the services provided by the petitioner were exempted by virtue of the aforesaid Mega NC: 2024:KHC:7049 Exemption Notification No.25/2012 dated 20.06.2012 and by applying the doctrine of parity, the impugned order which is in relation to the earlier assessment years 2014- 15 and 2015-16 deserves to be set aside.

Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents would support the impugned order and submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed especially when the issues involved in the impugned order and the order dated 21.07.2022 are different.

As rightly contented by the learned counsel for the petitioner, despite the submission of the reply vide Annexure-B dated 19.02.2021 by the petitioner, the third respondent has neither adverted to the said reply nor considered the specific contention of the petitioner that they would be exempted from payment of service tax by virtue of Mega Exemption Notification No.25/2012 dated 20.06.2012. In fact, the impugned order clearly discloses that there is absolutely no reference to the aforesaid Mega NC: 2024:KHC:7049 Exemption Notification and in the absence of any material produced to show that sufficient and reasonable opportunity was provided to the petitioner before passing the impugned order, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order is in violation of principles of natural justice and the same deserves to be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the third respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

In the result, the following : ORDER i. The petition is hereby allowed.

2022 [Annexure-D] after considering the reply at Annexure-B dated 19.02.2021 submitted by the petitioner.