20232257YX0000163885 dated 13.11.2023
(Annexure-A) passed by Respondent No. 1,
demanding service tax of ₹2,03,13,910/- along with
interest and penalty for the Financial Year 2015-16.
NC: 2025:KHC:36057
HC-KAR
b. Remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for
fresh consideration.
c. Pass any other or further orders as this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of
justice."
2. Heard Sri. Venkatanarayana G M, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner, Sri. Aravind V Chavan, learned
counsel appearing for respondents and perused the material on
record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
issue in the lis is akin to what is decided by the Coordinate
Bench in the case of KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST
vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX,
BENGALURU EAST1. He would submit that several of the
petitions were disposed in the same terms.
4. Learned counsel for the Revenue would not dispute
the position.
(2024) 25 Centax 382 (Kar.)
NC: 2025:KHC:36057
HC-KAR
5. I, therefore, deem it appropriate to notice what the
Coordinate Bench has held in the case of KARNATAKA
CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF
CENTRAL TAX, BENGALURU EAST supra, which 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 ?
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:
NC: 2025:KHC:36057
HC-KAR
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.
Wherever demands have been made pursuant to
the impugned orders, such proceedings are also set
aside."
6. In the light of the submissions so made, the petition
deserves to be disposed, in the same terms as is done by the
Coordinate Bench, in the judgment quoted supra.
NC: 2025:KHC:36057
HC-KAR
7. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
a. The Writ Petition is allowed.
b. Impugned Order (Original) dated 13-11-2023
[Annexure-A] passed by the 1st respondent
stands quashed.
c. The matter is remitted back for reconsideration
from the stage of show-cause notice afresh, to
the hands of the respondents, in accordance
with law, bearing in mind the observations
made in the case of KARNATAKA CHINMAYA
SEVA TRUST supra.
d. The petitioner is at liberty to file his pleadings
within a reasonable time as may be fixed by
the concerned Officer of the Revenue.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
(M.NAGAPRASANNA)
JUDGE
BKP
