Shri Muniswamy Murali Vs Joint Commissioner of Central Taxes

JOINT COMMISIONER OF CENTRAL TAXES, GST COMMISSIONERATE, BANGALORE NORTH WEST, 2^ND FLOOR, SOUTH WING, BMTC BUS STAND, SHIVAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560051.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(BY SRI. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, ADVOCATE)

¶17

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL DATED 23-08-2022 PASSED IN ORDER SL.NO.20/JC/BNW/2022/BNW IN FILE NO. GEXCOM/ADJN/ST/1444/2021/3089/4, BEARING DIN NO. 20220857YX000000C9EF FOR THE TAX PERIODS IN THE FINANCIAL YEARS 2015-16, 2016-17 AND 2017-18 FOR 3 MONTHS UNDER SECTIONS 70, 73(1), 75, 77 AND 78 OF THE

¶18

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:16964 WP No. 5662 of 2026

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

FINANCE ACT, 1994, LEVYING TAX, INTEREST AND PENALTY, PASSED BY JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, THE RESPONDENT HEREIN, IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER ANNEXURE - A AND ETC.,

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

The petitioner has called in question the validity of the Order-in-Original at Annexure-A, whereby the authorities have concluded the adjudication in terms of the Finance Act, 1994 and determined liability as regards service tax.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceedings relating to adjudication of service tax in terms of the provisions of the Finance Act is based on information received from Income Tax authorities and this Court has taken note of observations made in W.P.No.11154/2023 and remitted the matter back for reconsideration.

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:16964 WP No. 5662 of 2026

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶29

the Order-in-Original is an ex-parte order and if the petitioner is granted an opportunity, petitioner would meet the grounds raised in the show-cause notice and has raised various contentions including that the claim is barred by limitation, that the petitioner is entitled for claim regarding CENVAT credit under applicable rules and has raised certain other contentions as well.

¶30

Perused the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in

¶31

W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected petitions.

¶32

This Court while disposing of the said petitions

¶33

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:-

¶34

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

¶35

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:16964 WP No. 5662 of 2026

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

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

¶38

2) Whether services are covered under negative list ?

¶39

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?

¶40

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

¶41

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

¶42

11. It is also clarified that disposal of present petitions must not be construed as having adjudicated any of the contentions including jurisdiction. All contentions of both sides on merits are kept open.

¶43

12. Needless to state, upon conclusion of proceedings, if any of the petitioners are still aggrieved, legal remedies are kept open. It is also clarified that wherever, replies to show-cause notice have not been made out, the same may be filed upon matter being relegated as noticed above.

¶44

13. Accordingly, the following:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

In light of observations made above, the writ petitions relating to challenge to show-cause notice, such matters will stand relegated to the officers to be designated in terms of the observations made in

¶47

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:16964 WP No. 5662 of 2026

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

para 8 above, at the same stage. Accordingly, such of the petitions at Sl.No.1 to 5 in Column No.1 of the table relating to challenge to show-cause notice are disposed off.

¶50

Insofar as such writ petitions as detailed in Column 2 of the table relating to challenge to Orders-inOriginal, in light of the discussion made above, the Orders-in-Original stand set aside and the matters are relegated to the Officers to be designated to be reconsidered from the stage of show-cause notice. Accordingly, such of the petitions at Sl.No.1 to 35 in Column No.2 of the table relating to challenge to Orders-in-Original are disposed off.

¶51

The petitioners who are now relegated before the authorities concerned are at liberty to file their pleadings within a reasonable time as may be fixed by the Officers concerned. Wherever the matters are pending in appeal in light of the arrangement that is made, petitioners to file a memo for withdrawal of appeal and accordingly, the orders-inoriginal in question would also receive the same treatment, i.e. be set aside as per the directions made above.

¶52

Wherever demands have been made pursuant to the impugned orders, such proceedings are also set aside."

¶53

6. Accordingly, the Order-in-Original at

¶54

Annexure-A is set aside. The matter is remitted to the

¶55

stage of reply to the show-cause notice. The authorities to take note of the observations made in the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected

¶56

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:16964 WP No. 5662 of 2026

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

petitions as extracted supra, in specific, to the observations at para-10 of the order as may be applicable. All contentions of the petitioner raised in the present petition as well are kept open.

¶59

Needless to state, that the petitioner is at

¶60

liberty to make out a fresh reply to the show cause notice. The petitioner to appear before the respondent without further notice on 21.04.2026.

¶61

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of .

¶62

SD/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

¶63

MCR

Shri Muniswamy Murali v. Joint Commissioner of Central Taxes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Muniswamy Murali v. Joint Commissioner of Central Taxes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lnr Public School Trust Vs Assessment Unit

Shri Sathya Vs National Faceless Assessment Centre

M/S. Maruthi Mechanical and Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs Joint Commissioner of Central Tax (Gst)

M/S Acruti Design Services Vs Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Sri. S.A. Rasheed Vs the State of Karnataka

Boraiah Suresh, Vs Income Tax Officer