##PAGE1##

- 1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:4777

WP No. 1134 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

WRIT PETITION NO. 1134 OF 2026 (T-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI. MAHESH S. MALLANGOUDAR,

AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,

SON OF SRI. SHARANAPPA,

RESIDING AT NO.420,

4^TH FLOOR RADIANT SPENCER,

DADDYS GARDEN ROAD,

KAMMASANDRA,

BANGALORE SOUTH,

BENGALURU, KARNATAKA - 560100.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. LAKSHMI MENON, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally

signed by

VIJAYA P

1. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX,

Location:

HIGH COURT BANGALORE SOUTH,

OF

KARNATAKA GST COMMISSIONERATE,

BENGALURU - 560001.

2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX,

ARREARS RECOVERY CELL HQRS,

BENGALURU SOUTH COMMISSIONERATE,

BENGALURU - 560001.

3. BRANCH MANAGER,

HDFC BANK,

##PAGE2##

- 2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:4777

WP No. 1134 of 2026

HC-KAR

NO. 103/31, BLOCK NO. 4T,

26^TH MAIN ROAD, JAYANAGAR,

BENGALURU - 560041.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. ARAVIND V. CHAVAN, ADVOCATE)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE

CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE

RESPONDENT NO.1 TO PRODUCE THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE

NO. F.NO.GEXCOM/ADJN/ST/JC/1469/2021 (SCN NO.331/

2021-22) DATED 21.10.2021 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT

AND TO FURNISH A COPY OF THE SAME TO THE PETITIONER

HEREIN AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY

HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner has called in question the validity of

the show-cause notice dated 21.10.2021. Petitioner has

sought for setting aside of the impugned order in original

dated 15.06.2023 passed by respondent No.1. Petitioner

has also sought for setting aside of Form GST DRC-13 at

Annexure-C.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the order of

adjudication passed is an ex-parte order and there has

been no service of show-cause notice. It is contented that

##PAGE3##

- 3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:4777

WP No. 1134 of 2026

HC-KAR

the petitioner is engaged exclusively providing back-office

and support services to an overseas entity located in the

United States of America. It is asserted that the petitioner

does not render any services in India and does not have

any Indian customers and accordingly, the petitioner had

not registered itself under the provisions of the Service

Tax Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner does not come within the purview of the

service tax regime and that this Court in

W.P.No.11154/2023 had remitted matters back to the

assessing officer to re-adjudicate in matters where service

tax adjudication has been made on the basis of inputs

received from Central Board of Direct Taxes or on the

basis of information furnished in the income tax returns. It

is submitted that taking note of the directions passed in

W.P.No.11154/2023, in the present matter also similar

order may be passed.

##PAGE4##

- 4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:4777

WP No. 1134 of 2026

HC-KAR

4. Perused the order in original at Annexure-B. It

is to be noticed that the order in original is passed on the

basis of a show cause notice which bases itself on data

received from the Income Tax Department. Reference is

made in the order in original to the fact that the noticee

had declared income from provision of services.

5. It is clear that the order in original is based on

information relied on by the authority relating to a

provision of services stated to have been referred to in the

income tax return by the petitioner.

6. The observations made in W.P.No.11154/2023

are extracted as hereunder:

"9. Needless to state, a bare perusal of

the petition reveals that the petitioner has raised

various contentions which are required to be

referred back for consideration by the appropriate

authorities so that officers concerned may take

note of the same while disposing off the petition

at the stage of post show-cause notice.

##PAGE5##

- 5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:4777

WP No. 1134 of 2026

HC-KAR

10. The officers while disposing off the

petition to keep in mind the following:

1) Whether petitioner do not qualify under

Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act,

Click Here to Read the rest of this document