Allowed¶45

Sri.Abdul Razak v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Nov 2025WP/12814/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court (Bengaluru), S.R. Krishna Kumar J., 03-11-2025, WP No. 12814 of 2025 (T-RES): writ petition allowed and service-tax Order-in-Original (MYS-EXCUS-000-DIVS-AC-KJ-310-2022-23, DIN 20230457YY000000A314) passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, Shivamogga Division quashed, after Indian Oil Corporation Limited confirmed discharge of the entire service tax liability under RCM for GTA services rendered from FY 2016-17; reliefs sought included certiorari and prohibition against coercive steps; no cases cited; no amounts awarded.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; the impugned Order-in-Original at Annexure-A (dated 31.03.2023 as stated in the operative order) passed by respondent No.2 is quashed. ¶45

Sri.Abdul Razak Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:44278 WP No. 12814 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.12814 OF 2025 (T-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI.ABDUL RAZAK S/O.SRI.IQBAL AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT 15^TH CROSS, RIGHT SIDE, OLD SOCIETY, SULEBAIL, SHIVAMOGGA – 577 203.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. T.S. VENKATESH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

¶13

COMMERCIAL TAXES DEPARTMENT

¶14

GOODS AND SERVICE TAX (GST)

¶15

COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICE-1 (VANIJYA TERIGE KARYALA-1) 1^ST MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 009.

¶16

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M

¶17

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶18

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, SHIVAMOGGA DIVISION 6^TH CROSS, ASHWATH NAGAR,

¶19

OFF SAVALANGA ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA – 577 204.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. JYOTI M. MARADI, HCGP FOR R-1;

¶22

SRI. SHISHIRA AMARNATH, ADV. FOR R-2)

¶23

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL (OIO) NO. MYS-EXCUS-000-DIVS-AC-KJ-310-2022-23 DIN 20230457YY000000A314 DTD. 19.04.2023 BY THE R-2 ANNX-A AND ETC.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS , THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

¶26

NC: 2025:KHC:44278 WP No. 12814 of 2025

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

¶31

“ a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other order, writ or direction thereby quash an Order-in-Original (OIO) No.MYS-EXCUS-000-DIVS-AC-KJ-310-2022-23 DIN: 20230457YY000000A314 dated 19.04.2023 by the 2^nd Respondent Annexure-A

¶32

b) Issue writ of prohibition or any other order, writ or direction thereby restraining the respondent Authorities from taking coercive steps as per Order-in-Original (OIO) No.MYS-EXCUS-000-DIVS-AC-KJ-310-2022-23, DIN: 20230457YY000000A314 dated 19.04.2023 by the 2^nd Respondent Annexure-A

¶33

c) Grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case including and order awarding costs of this proceedings, in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a memo dated 02.05.2025 has been filed along with copy of the Communication dated 30.04.2025 issued by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited. The said memo reads as under:

¶35

“The undersigned counsel for the petitioner herewith produces the letter dated 30.04.2025 issued by Indian Oil Corporation confirming that for the GTA services provided by

¶36

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:44278 WP No. 12814 of 2025

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

the petitioner to Indian Oil Corporation Limited from FY 2016-17, Service Tax Liability was discharged by Indian Oil Corporation Limited under RCM for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶39

In view of the aforesaid memo filed by the petitioner

¶40

and the Communication issued by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited to the petitioner clarifying that the entire service tax liability demanded from the petitioner has been discharged, I deem it just and appropriate to quash the impugned Order-in-original at Annexure – A passed by respondent No.2 against the petitioner.

¶41