Karnataka High Court
Late Shri Venku Reddy Pinnamreddy vs Principal Commissioner Of Central ... on 8 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14410
WP No. 105927 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 105927 OF 2023 (T-RES)
BETWEEN:
LATE SHRI VENKU REDDY PINNAMREDDY
NO.8, VIDYAVANA, VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI-580021.
BY LEGAL HEIR SHRI P. SUDHIR REDDY
SON OF LATE SHRI. VENKU REDDY PINNAMREDDY
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. H. R. KAMBIYAVAR AND SRI. ASHOK A. KULKARNI,
SMT. ROOPA ANVEKAR, ADVOCATES)
AND:
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS
AND SERVICE TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE, NO.71,
CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI, KARNATAKA-590001.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GIRISH S. HULMANI, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
by
MOHANKUMAR
MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR
B SHELAR
Date: OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH BY AN
2023.12.13
11:14:32 +0530
ORDER, WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, THE
IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. OIO SL.NO. BEL-EXCUS-000-HBL-
DIV-COMMR-MG-56/2022-23-ST DATED 24.04.2023 IN ANNEXURE-
'B' PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT AS UNLAWFUL, ILLEGAL, VOID-AB-
INITIO AND ULTRA VIRES THE PROVISIONS OF FINANCE ACT, 1994.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14410
WP No. 105927 of 2023
ORDER
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the
respondent.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
would submit that under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act,
1994, calling upon the assessee to produce documents
relating to the transactions for the year 2015-16 and
2016-17. The assessee died on 10.05.2021. When the
notice was issued, the assessee was alive. He died 18 days
after the notice. The son of the assessee brought it to the
notice of the adjudicating officer. The adjudicating officer
proceeded to fix the liability on the assessee. The
adjudicating officer passed an order without hearing the
son of the assessee.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that liability of the assessee to pay service tax, if any,
cannot be fastened on the legal representatives of the
assessee. He would rely upon the judgment of the Apex
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14410
Court in the case of Shabina Abraham Vs.Collector of
Central Excise & Customs, (2015)61 taxmann.com
95 (SC) and the judgment of this Court in the case of
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs.Dhiren Gandhi,
(2011) 33 STT 544 (Karnataka).
4. Referring to the aforementioned judgments, he
would submit that the liability cannot be fastened on the
legal representatives of the assessee. He would also point
out the fact that in the aforementioned cases, adjudication
had taken place when the assessee was alive. The
assessee died after adjudication. The adjudicated amount
was sought to be recovered from the legal representatives
of the assessee.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent would
submit that the facts of the aforementioned cases are
different and not applicable to the facts of the present
case and justified the impugned order.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14410
6. This Court has considered the contentions
raised at the bar.
7. From the facts admitted, it can be noticed that
the notice was issued to the assessee and before
completion of the proceeding by the competent authority,
the assessee died. Death of assessee was brought to the
notice of the competent authority by the son of the
assessee. However, no further notice was issued to the
son of the assessee before passing the order adjudicating
the amount.
8. In the judgments cited above, it is noticed that
there was already an adjudication during the lifetime of
the assessee and before the amount adjudicated was
recovered, the assessee died and the adjudicated amount
was sought to be recovered from the legal representatives
of the assessee. Even under those circumstances, the
Court has held that the liability cannot be fastened on the
legal representatives of the assessee in respect of service
tax payable by the assessee.
NC: 2023:KHC-D:14410
9. Considering the fact situation in the
aforementioned cases, this Court is of the view that the
petitioner is on a better footing. The assessee died before
adjudication and order is passed against a dead person
and sought to be recovered from the son of a dead person.
The ratio laid down in the aforementioned cases squarely
applies to the facts of the case. Accordingly, the writ
petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 24.04.2023
passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Good &
Service Tax & Central Excise, Belagavi is quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KGK/ct-an
