Karnataka High Court
Infovista India Software Private ... vs The Joint Commissioner Of Central Tax on 11 September, 2025
Author: M.Nagaprasanna
Bench: M.Nagaprasanna
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:36059
WP No. 19194 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO. 19194 OF 2025 (T-RES)
BETWEEN:
INFOVISTA INDIA SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED
(FORMERLY ASCOM NETWORK TESTING
PRIVATE LIMITED )
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
SHRI DINAKARA KINI,
S/O SHRI DAMODAR KINI
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
HAVING OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR
U.B. PLAZA, NO. 1 AND 2,
VITHAL MALYA ROAD
Digitally MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD
signed by
NAGAVENI BENGALURU - 560 025
Location: EMAIL: [email protected]
High Court of
Karnataka MOB:+91 98452 75804
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI PRADYUMNA HEJIB, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX
BENGALURU EAST COMMISSIONERATE
TTMC-BMTC COMPLEX
HAL AIRPORT ROAD, DOMMALURU
BENGALURU - 560 071.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:36059
WP No. 19194 of 2025
HC-KAR
2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX,
ANTI EVASION
BENGALURU EAST COMMISSIONERATE
TTMC-BMTC COMPLEX
HAL AIRPORT ROAD, DOMMALURU
BENGALURU - 560 071.
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
HQRS - TRC,
BENGALURU EAST COMMISSIONERATE
TTMC-BMTC COMPLEX
HAL AIRPORT ROAD, DOMMALURU
BENGALURU - 560 071.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI ARAVIND V CHAVAN, ADVOCATE)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) QUASH
IMPUGNED ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL BEARING NO. 85/2023 (DIN
2023 0357YT0000421281) DATED 27.03.2023 ANNEXURE-A)
PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT; (B) QUASH THE
RECOVERY NOTICE BEARING FILE NO.
GEXCOM/TAR/D/ST/2863/2024-AE (DIN 2025 02570000 0000
6850) DATED 20.02.2025 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT
(ANNEXURE-B).
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:36059
WP No. 19194 of 2025
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER
Petitioner is before this Court seeking the following
prayers:
"(a) Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other
appropriate writ/s to quash impugned Order-in-Original
bearing No. 85/2023 [DIN 2023 0357YT0000421281]
dated 27.03.2023 [ANNEXURE - A] passed by the First
Respondent;
(b) Issue a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other
appropriate Writ to quash the Recovery Notice bearing
File No. GEXCOM/TAR/D/ST/2863/2024-AE [DIN 2025
02570000 0000 6850] dated 20.02.2025 issued by the
Third Respondent [Annexure - B];
(c) Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit in the
facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of
justice."
2. Heard Sri. Pradyumna Hejib, 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
NC: 2025:KHC:36059
HC-KAR
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.
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?
(2024) 25 Centax 382 (Kar.)
NC: 2025:KHC:36059
HC-KAR
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:
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
NC: 2025:KHC:36059
HC-KAR
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.
7. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
a. The Writ Petition is allowed.
b. Order-in-Original dated 27-03-2023 [Annexure-
A] passed by the 1st respondent stands
quashed.
c. Recovery notice dated 20-02-2025 issued by
the 3rd respondent stands quashed.
d. The matter is remitted back for reconsideration
from the stage of show-cause notice afresh, to
the hands of the respondents, in accordance
NC: 2025:KHC:36059
HC-KAR
with law, bearing in mind the observations
made in 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
