Shri Sidram Bhuthappa Hirekurabar vs Union Of India
2025 Latest Caselaw 10454 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Shri Sidram Bhuthappa Hirekurabar vs Union Of India on 20 November, 2025

Author: M.Nagaprasanna

Bench: M.Nagaprasanna

                                                    -1-
                                                                 NC: 2025:KHC-D:15978
                                                              WP No. 108061 of 2025


                       HC-KAR



                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
                           DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
                                             BEFORE
                            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
                            WRIT PETITION NO. 108061 OF 2025 (T-RES)
                      BETWEEN:

                      SHRI. SIDRAM BHUTHAPPA HIREKURABAR,
                      S/O. BHUTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
                      R/O. 2087/3/1, SIDDESHWAR NAGAR,
                      KABBUR, CHIKODI TALUK,
                      DIST. BELAGAVI-591222.
                                                                          ...PETITIONER
                      (BY    SRI. ATUL K ALUR, AND
                             SRI. N.P. VIVEK MEHTA, ADVOCATES)

                      AND:

                      1.    UNION OF INDIA
                            THROUGH ITS SECRETARY (REVENUE),
                            MINISTRY OF FINANCE,
                            DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
                            GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
                            NORTH BLOCK,
                            NEW DELHI-110001.
Digitally signed by
VISHAL NINGAPPA       2.    THE COMMISSIONER OF
PATTIHAL
                            CENTRAL GST AND
Location: High
Court of Karnataka,         CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS),
Dharwad Bench,
Dharwad                     NO.71, CLUB ROAD,
                            BELAGAVI-590001.

                      3.    THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF
                            CENTRAL TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE,
                            BELAGAVI RURAL DIVISION,
                            NO.71, CLUB ROAD,
                            BELAGAVI-590001.
                                                                     ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY    SRI.M.B. KANAVI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
                             SRI. GIRISH HULMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)
                             -2-
                                           NC: 2025:KHC-D:15978
                                     WP No. 108061 of 2025


HC-KAR



     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO:


  A) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, OR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
     QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER-IN-APPEAL VIDE OIA NO.
     BGM-EXCUS-000-APP-COMMR-VDJ-088-2025-26                    AT
     ANNEXURE-E ISSUED BY RESPONDENT-2 INSOFAR AS THE
     PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.


  B) ISSUE WRIT OF DECLARATION OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF
     DECLARATION DECLARING THAT THE RESP-3 WAS NOT RIGHT
     IN LEVYING THE SERVICE TAX ON THE ENTIRE VALUE OF THE
     LABOR CHARGES FOR THE PERIOD FROM APRIL 2015 TO JUNE
     2017 INSOFAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.


  C) ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR WRIT IN THE NATURE OF
     MANDAMUS,     DIRECTING   THE   RESP-3     TO    ALLOW    THE
     APPORTIONMENT/SETOFF      AS    PER     THE     SERVICE   TAX
     (DETERMINATION OF VALUE) RULES, 2006 INSOFAR AS THE
     PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.


  D) ISSUE ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTIONS DEEMED FIT, IN THE
     FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE, INCLUDING THE
     COST OF THE WRIT PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
     AND EQUITY.


  THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
                                 -3-
                                             NC: 2025:KHC-D:15978
                                          WP No. 108061 of 2025


HC-KAR



                           ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the

following prayer:

A) Issue a writ of certiorari, or writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned Order-In-Appeal vide OIA No.BGM-EXCUS-000-APP-

COMMR-VDJ-088-2025-26 at ANNEXURE-E issued by Respondent-2 insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

B) Issue writ of declaration or writ in the nature of declaration declaring that the Resp-3 was not right in levying the service tax on the entire value of the labor charges for the period from April 2015 to June 2017 insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

C) Issue Writ of Mandamus or writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Resp-3 to allow the apportionment/setoff as per the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 insofar as the Petitioner is concerned.

D) Issue any other Writ or Directions deemed fit, in the facts and circumstance of the case, including the cost of the Writ Petition, in the interest of justice and equity.

2. Heard learned counsel Sri.Atul K. Alur and

Sri.N.P.Vivekmehta, appearing for petitioner, learned counsel

Sri.M.B.Kanavi, appearing for respondent No.1 and learned

counsel Sri.Girish Hulmani, appearing for respondent

Nos.2 and 3.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits

that the issue in the lis stands answered by the judgment

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15978

HC-KAR

rendered by a co-ordinate bench in the case of M/S

KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST VS. JOINT

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, in W.P.No.11154/2023

AND CONNECTED MATTERS, disposed on 03.07.2024.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents would not dispute

the position of law, except the fact that the matter should be

remitted to the stage of the submission of reply to the show

cause notice by the petitioner.

5. The co-ordinate bench in the aforesaid

W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected matters, considering the

entire spectrum of the law and issue, passed the following order:

"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 ?

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15978

HC-KAR

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.

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.

13. Accordingly, the following:

ORDER 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 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.

Insofar as such writ petitions as detailed in Column 2 of the table relating to challenge to Orders-in-Original, 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.

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- in-original in question would also receive the same treatment, i.e. be set aside as per the directions made above.

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15978

HC-KAR

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

In the light of the afore-quoted judgment of the coordinate

bench and that the fact the petitioner is similarly placed, I deem

it appropriate to remit the matter back to respondent

No.3 -Authority.

6. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

ORDER

a. The writ petition is allowed and remitted back to respondent No.3 - Authority.

b. The impugned order-in-Appeal vide OIA No.BGM- EXCUS-000-APP-COMMR-VDJ-088-2025-26 vide Annexure-E issued by respondent No.2, stand quashed.

c. The petitioner shall now submit his reply to the show cause notice dated 17.04.2021, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

d. Respondent No.3 shall, from the stage of submitting reply to the show cause notice by the petitioner, consider the same and pass necessary orders in accordance with law, bearing in mind the afore-quoted judgment of the co-ordinate bench.

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15978

HC-KAR

e. It is open to the authority to regulate its procedure and take the issue to its logical conclusion.

Ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

(M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE

RHR/-CT:ANB