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) 2787

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.
Smt. Shantha, W/o. Ramesh Nayak - Petitioner
Versus 
The Assistant Commissioner Of Central Tax - Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 106325 OF 2025 (T-RES)
Decided On : 17-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri. G. V. Ramanagoudar, Advocate
For the Respondent:Sri. G. S. Hulmani, Advocate

The court emphasized the necessity for designated officers to reconsider service tax compliance matters, underscoring procedural adherence in issuing show-cause notices under the Finance Act, 1994.

Headnote:(A) Finance Act, 1994 - Sections 65B(44), 66B, and 73(1) - Challenge to show-cause notice and Orders-in-Original - Petitioner sought to quash orders based on service tax liability involving information from the Central Board of Direct Taxes - Court found similar matters covered by previous judgment, necessitating reconsideration by designated officers - Quashment of impugned order deemed necessary for proper adjudication based on similar legal principles. (Paras 2, 10, 11)

(B) Tax Liability - Proper procedure under Finance Act for issuance of show cause notice was highlighted - No prohibition in relying on third-party information, ensuring adherence to statutory compliance. (Paras 4-10)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged an order related to service tax liability based on inputs from the CBDT. The Court noted that similar petitions were pending and pertinent issues were raised concerning service tax compliance and the issuance of show-cause notices.

Findings of Court:
The impugned order was quashed and the matter was referred back to appropriate officers for reconsideration based on specific identified issues.

Issues: Key issues included whether the petitioners qualified under the Finance Act, contractual liability, and the verification process for issued show-cause notices.

Ratio Decidendi: The decision emphasized the need for reconsideration by proper authorities based on statutory principles and indicated that adherence to procedures outlined in the Finance Act was paramount.

Result: The order dated 12.05.2022 was quashed and the matters were directed to be reconsidered.

Table of Content
1. petition seeks quashing of a specific order. (Para 1)
2. legal contentions based on precedent case. (Para 2 , 3)
3. discussion on procedures and implications of tax evasion. (Para 4 , 5)

ORDER :

M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer:

A. Issue a Writ of Certiorari by quashing the order of the respondent dated 12.05.2022 passed in OIO No. Bel/EXCUS/000/DIVH/ASC/VM/11/2022-23 (Annexure- C).

B. Issue other writ or writs as the Hon’ble Court deems it fit, in the interest f justice in the Petitioner’s case.

2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.G.V.Ramanagoudar, appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel Sri.G.S.Hulmani, appearing for respondent.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the parties in unison would submit that, the issue in lis stands covered by the Judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this court in the case of Thamaneni Venkatareddy vs. The Assistant Commissioner in Writ Petition NO.628/2024 and connected matters dated 10.07.2024, wherein it was held as follows:

“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 (CBDT) on the basis o f Form 26AS/income tax returns filed.

2. Taking note of the order dated 03.07.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected petitions, the present batch of Writ Petitions are also required to be disposed of in light of the observations made therein, as the legal contentions are identical and would fall within the consideration as reflected in the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected petitions.

3. The observations made in the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected petitions, reads as follows:-

"These petitions have been filed calling in question the action of the respondent Department in issuing show-cause notice or having assed the orders-in-original relating to demand sought to be raised under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994relating to service tax liability.

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:

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 Tax Levy is on the taxable services provided by one person or Entity to another, in terms of the provisions contained i

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