M/S. Excalibur Security Services INDIA Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner

Facts

This case is a review petition filed by M/s. Excalibur Security Services India Private Limited, challenging an order dated 02.01.2025 passed in Writ Petition No. 32433 of 2024. The original writ petition primarily challenged notifications that extended a due date and also contended that the show-cause notice and impugned assessment orders were unsigned documents. The High Court, in the original writ petition, had relegated the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal. The review petition arises from a consensus reached between the parties during the hearing. The petitioner is represented by Ms. Y. Siri Reddy, and the respondents include the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax) and the Union of India.

Held

The Court acknowledged a consensus reached between the parties. It was agreed that the order under review, which was passed in WP No. 32433 of 2024, was the common order. The primary challenge in the original writ petition was to notifications extending a due date, which were upheld. However, another ground was that the show-cause notice and impugned assessment orders were unsigned documents. The parties agreed that the curtains were finally drawn on this issue by the Court in WP No. 21101 of 2024 and batch. Consequently, there was no point in relegating the petitioner to the remedy of appeal. The Court modified the order under review to the extent agreed upon by the parties, setting aside the show-cause notice and the impugned orders that were unsigned. Liberty was reserved to the respondents to issue fresh show-cause notices in accordance with law and proceed further. Other conditions mentioned in the order passed in WP No. 21101 of 2024 and batch were to apply mutatis mutandis.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court's previous order in WP No. 32433 of 2024, which relegated the petitioner to the remedy of appeal, was appropriate, considering the challenge to unsigned show-cause notices and assessment orders. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the show-cause notice and impugned assessment orders were unsigned documents, rendering them invalid. They sought to have these set aside. They also relied on the fact that the Court had already dealt with a similar issue in WP No. 21101 of 2024 and batch. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, represented by the Special GP for State Tax, and the Union of India, represented by the Deputy Solicitor General and SC for CBIT, agreed to a consensus with the petitioner. They acknowledged the issue of unsigned documents and the prior decision of the Court in WP No. 21101 of 2024 and batch.