SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 1215

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.
M/s. Manjunath and Brothers - Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Bangalore - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 25679 of 2025
Decided On : 08-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Chethan A.C.
For the Respondent: Jeevan J. Neeralgi

The court emphasized that service tax notices must be issued based on verified data and adherence to natural justice, reaffirming prior judicial decisions.

Headnote:(A) Finance Act, 1994 - Sections 65B(44) and 66B - Writ petition challenging Order-in-Original for service tax liability issued based on data from Income Tax returns - Petition dismissed in terms of previous judgments - Coordinate Bench found issuance of show-cause notices without due verification by the department to be inappropriate. (Paras 3, 11)

(B) Judicial Review - Nature - High Court has the jurisdiction to examine administrative decisions, ensuring due process and natural justice are upheld when significant administrative actions are undertaken. (Paras 8, 9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to quash the Order-in-Original No.54/2023 issued for service tax compliance. The legal counsel positioned the case as congruent with earlier judgments, leading to coordinated handling. The Revenue's counsel did not contest this position significantly.

Findings of Court:
The High Court permitted petitioners to present their responses and remitted the matter for a fresh evaluation from the stage of the show-cause notice, directing the designated officers to reconsider. The order was rendered necessary based on principles established in related previous rulings.

Issues: The primary issues concerned the jurisdiction and proper procedure for issuing service tax notices based on assumptions without adequate verification, and whether equitable processes were maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: The court underscored the inadequacy of presumption-based actions by the Revenue without thorough verification of submissions, thus ensuring compliance with natural justice principles was paramount.

Result: Writ petition allowed; Order-in-Original quashed and remitted for reconsideration.

Table of Content
1. petition is filed for quashing an order. (Para 1 , 2)
2. referencing previously decided cases. (Para 3 , 4)
3. details regarding the service tax process. (Para 5)

ORDER :

1. Petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayers:

“i. Issue a writ of certiorari or other writ or direction or order to quash the impugned Order-In-Original NO. 54/2023 dated 27/12/2023 (DIN. 20231257YX0000111CD8) (Annexure-A) in the interest of justice and equity.

ii. Pass such other order as this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. Heard Sri.Chethan A.C., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Jeevan J. Neeralgi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents and have perused the material on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue in the lis is akin to what is decided by the Coordinate Bench in W.P. No. 11154/2023 and W.P. No. 15959/2021 and connected matters, between M/s Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax and Another disposed on 03.07.2024. He would submit that several of the petition was disposed in the same terms.

4. Learned counsel for the Revenue would not dispute the position.

5. I, therefore deem it appropriate to notice what the Coordinate Bench has held in W.P. No. 11154/2023 and W.P. No. 15959/2021 and connected matters, between M/s Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax and Another disposed on 03.07.2024, which reads as follows:

“2. In all these matters, the proceedings by way of show-cause notice under the FINANCE ACT for service tax liability have been initiated on the basis of inputs received from the Central Board of Direct Taxes on the basis of Form 26AS/Income Tax returns filed.

3. The details of the writ petitions and the stages are as follows:

Challenge to Show-cause NoticeChallenge to Orders-in-Original
Column No.1Column No.2
WP No.16891/2022WP No.12840/2023
WP No.13445/2023WP No.15832/2022
WP No.15959/2021WP No.3318/2023
WP No.24822/2022WP No.14425/2022
WP No.8514/2023WP No.15018/2022
WP No.24650/2022
WP No.12906/2023
WP No.22063/2022
WP No.19792/2022
WP No.25156/2022
WP No.5896/2023
WP No.17407/2023
WP No.11154/2023
WP No.9765/2022
WP No.17591/2022
WP No.1754/2023
WP No.8858/2023
WP No.16501/2023
WP No.7071/2023
WP No.9906/2023
WP No.8409/2023
WP No.8184/2023
WP No.16170/2022
WP No.1198/2024
WP No.14092/2023
WP No.341/2023
WP No.274/2023
WP No.12003/2022
WP No.13813/2022
WP No.7829/2023
WP No.20282/2022
WP No.19000/2022
WP No.8336/2023
WP No.10238/2023
WP No.6756/2024

4. After having heard the matters on various occasions, the Union of India have taken a stand and filed affidavit of the Principal Commissioner, Central Taxes.

5. Sri.N.Venkataraman, learned Additional Solicitor General who was present before the court on 27.06.2024 had submitted that they desire that the matters be resolved and accordingly have putforth a proposed mechanism and made certain suggestions in the affidavit filed. The relevant extract of the affidavit filed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, presently holding charge of Bengaluru West and additional charge of Bengaluru East Commissionerate reads as hereunder:

"I, Kiran Verma, working as Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, presently holding charge of Bengaluru West and additional charge of Bengaluru East Commissionerate, Bengaluru do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows:

I am working as Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, Bengaluru West and holding additional charge of Bengaluru East Commissionerate, Bengaluru -560071. I am the concerned person in the above Writ Petition. I am fully conversant with the facts of the case. I am authorized to swear to this affidavit.

1. I submit that in the above batch of cases, the dispute is regarding the Issuance of the Show Cause Notice and demand of Service Tax made on the basis of information provided by CBDT (Central Board of Direct Taxes) as per the assessee's Income Tax returns. The Service

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top