The court set aside an ex-parte Order-in-Original for service tax demand based on income tax returns, remitting the matter to the show-cause notice stage to allow the petitioner to present a reply and claim exemptions under Notification No. 25/2012.

Digitally signed by VIJAYA P CENTRAL TAX, Location: WEST DIVISION-3, HIGH COURT OF BANGALORE WEST COMMISSIONERATE, KARNATAKA 1ST FLOOR, TTMC COMPLEX, BMTC BUS STAND, BANASHANKARI, BENGALURU - 560 070.

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I) QUASH THE ORDER IN ORIGINAL DATED 06.01.2023 VIDE ORDER NO. IV/16/31/2020 BWD3 15-16 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 L.E., THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX BEARING DIN NO. 202211570000000A9F. COPY OF THE ORDER IN ORIGINAL DATED 30/11/2022 ORDER NO. IV/16/31/2020 BWD3 15-16 BEARING DIN NO. 202211570000000A9F PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 IS ENCLOSED AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-A1 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

1. Sri Aravind V. Chavan, learned counsel is directed to accept notice for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has challenged the validity of the Order-in-Original dated 06.01.2023 at Annexure-A1 passed by the respondent No.1, whereby the authorities have adjudicated under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1994 and raised a demand regarding service tax.

3. The petitioner submits that the authority has proceeded on the basis of the information available in the income tax returns as well as TDS certificates. It is submitted that in identical circumstances, the authority has proceeded to adjudicate claim of the department regarding service tax based on income tax returns. This Court in W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected petitions has set aside the order and remitted the matter for reconsideration in light of the observations made. It is submitted similar order may be passed in the present petition also.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is involved in supply of Fire Safety Services to the Government and other authorities and insofar as Government authorities are concerned, services rendered are exempt in terms of the Notification No.25/2012. It is submitted, that if the petitioner is permitted to make out a reply to the show-cause notice, the petitioner would clarify the issue as regards liability of the petitioner.

5. Noticing that the order passed is an exparte order, though the petitioner has been served with notice as contended by the revenue, it would be appropriate to pass order taking note of the observations made in W.P.No.11154/2023 and other connected petitions.

6. Perused the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected petitions.

7. This Court while disposing of the said petitions by remanding it to the stage of reply to the show cause notice had made certain observations to be kept in mind by the concerned officials. The observations made from para-10 onwards reads as follows:-

10. The officers while disposing off the petitions to keep in mind the following:

1) Whether petitioners do not qualify under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994 ?

2) Whether services are covered under negative list ?

3) Whether services are covered under the exemption list under the Notification No.25/2012-ST dated 28.06.2012 or under any other applicable Notifications?

4) Whether the person is liable to remit service tax in terms of Rule 2 (1) (d) read with applicable notification?

5) Whether claims are barred by limitation in terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court?