M/S Varalakshmi Tours and Travels v. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax

-e1e-e NC:(2026:KHC:34232( WP(No.(18458(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( e ( ( e INATHEAHIGHACOURTAOFAKARNATAKAAATABENGALURUA e THDATEDATHISATHEA8 ADAYAOFAJULY,A2026A e BEFOREA e THEAHON'BLEAMR.AJUSTICEABAMASHYAMAPRASADA e WRITAPETITIONANO.A18458AOFA2026A(T-RES)A e BETWEEN:AA e M/S.-VARALAKSHMI-TOURS-- e AND-TRAVELS,- C/O-RAMACHANDRA-NAIDU,--e AGED-ABOUT-55-YEARS-e REP.-BY-ITS-PROPRIETOR-- SRI-N-DEVARAJULU-NAIDU,-e ST THNO.179,-1 -MAIN,-8 -CROSS,-- e MSR-NAGAR,-BENGALURU---560054- …PETITIONER-e (BY-SMT.-RAMA-P-V.,-ADVOCATE)- e AND:A e

1.-THE-ASSISTANT-COMMISSIONER--e OF-CENTRAL-TAX,-NORTH-DIVISION-6,--e BENGALURU-NORTH--COMMISSIONERATE,--e ST1 -FLOOR,-HMT-BHAVAN,--Digitally signedtiby GANGA-NAGAR,-BELLARY-ROAD,--VANAMALA BENGALURU---560-032-eN -Location: 2.-COMMISSIONER-OF-CENTRAL-TAX-HIGH BENGALURU-NORTH--COURT0OF COMMISSIONERATE-KARNATAKA NO.-59,-HMT-BHAVAN,--BELLARY-ROAD,-GANGANAGARA,--BENGALURU---560-032--

3.-THE-BANK-MANAGER-KARNATAKA-BANK-LIMITED-SITE-NO.21,-50-FEET-MAIN-ROAD,---e2e-e NC:(2026:KHC:34232( WP(No.(18458(of(2026( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( CORPORATION-DIVISION-100,-SANJAYNAGAR,-BANGALORE-–-560094-…RESPONDENTS-(BY-SRI.-ARAVIND-V-CHAVAN,-ADVOCATE)--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-IN-THE-NATURE-OF-CERTIORARI-QUASHING-THE-SHOW-CAUSE-NOTICE-BEARING-CN.NO.IV/16/233/2020-21/ST-ND6-DATED-09.10.2021-ISSUED-BY-RESPONDENT-NO.1-IN-ANNEXURE-B-FOR-THE-PERIOD-2016-17-AND-2017-18-(APRIL-2017-JUNE-2017)-UNDER-SECTION-73-OF-FINANCE-ACT,-1994.-B.-ISSUE-A-WRIT-OF-CERTIORARI,-OR-WRIT-OF-CERTIORARI-QUASHING-THE-IMPUGNED-ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL-VIDE-ORDER-NO.-93/2023-24-DATED-28.03.2024-PASSED-BY-RESPONDENT-NO.1-AT-ANNEXURE-G-FOR-THE-PERIOD-2016-17-AND-2017-18-(APRIL-2017-JUNE-2017)-UNDER-SECTION-73-OF-FINANCE-ACT,-1994-IN-SO-FOR-AS-THE-PETITIONER-IS-CONCERNED.-C.-ISSUE-WRIT-OF-MANDAMUS-OR-WRIT-IN-THE-NATURE-OF-MANDAMUS-DIRECTING-THE-RESPONDENT-NO.1-TO-CONSIDER-THE-REPLY-/-DOCUMENTS-FILED-BY-THE-PETITIONER-ON-29.10.2021,-ANNEX-C-RECEIVED-BY-RESPONDENT-NO.1-ON-

09.11.2021,-IN-SO-FAR-AS-THE-PETITIONER-IS-CONCERNED.-D.-ISSUE-WRIT-OF-MANDAMUS-OR-WRIT-IN-THE-NATURE-OF-MANDAMUS-DIRECTING-THE-RESPONDENT-NO.1-TO-CONSIDER-THE-PAYMENT-

CHALLANS MADE BY THE RECIPIENT OF THE SERVICE FOR THE ASSESSMENT PERIODS 2016-17 AND 2017-18 (APRIL 2017-JUNE 2017), IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED., E. AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HONBLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND PROPER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioner's grievance is with the first respondent's Order dated 28.03.2024 [Annexure-G] under of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. The petitioner, while calling in question this order, has also called in question the Show Cause Notice dated

09.10.2021 [Annexure-B].

¶2Smt. Rama P V, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that [a] the petitioner is a Cab Operator whose liability to pay service tax is discharged under the Reverse Charge Mechanism by

the recipients and this is demonstrated by the different documents that the petitioner possesses but the proceedings are completed ex-parte, and [b] that upon service of notice, petitioner has entered appearance but the first respondent has concluded the proceedings without considering these documents in the premise that the petitioner has not furnished information.

¶3Sri Aravind V Chavan, a learned standing counsel for the first and second respondents who is called upon to accept notice for these respondents, is heard for disposal of the petition. This Court opines that there must be restoration of the proceedings because the proceedings are initiated based on information secured from the Central Board of Direct Taxes and are completed without considering the documents that the petitioner has produced. This Court is also persuaded to interfere with the petitioner asserting that the tax liability is discharged under

Reverse Charge Mechanisms by the service recipients such as the Government organizations to whom services are extended.

¶4Further, this Court, in similar circumstances, has intervened to restore proceedings for adjudication in the light of the decision of this Court in M/s. Karnataka Chinmaya Seva Trust Vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax in W.P. No.11154/2023 and connected matters dated

03.07.2024. Mr. Aravind V Chavan submits that after the afore decision, the jurisdictional officers have been conferred with jurisdiction to extend an opportunity and then pass just orders. Hence, the following: ORDER

[a] The petition is allowed-in-part and the impugned Order-in-Original dated

28.03.2024 [Annexure-G] is quashed restoring the proceedings to the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, North

Division-6, Bengaluru North Commissionerate, Bengaluru [the first respondent] for reconsideration.

[b] The petitioner shall, without further notice, file response, if any, with the Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, North Division-6, Bengaluru North Commissionerate, Bengaluru [the first respondent] by 18.08.2026 even without waiting for a certified copy of this Order.

[c] The Assistant Commissioner of Central Tax, North Division-6, Bengaluru North Commissionerate, Bengaluru [the first respondent] shall consider all circumstances without non-suiting the petitioner on the ground of delay.

Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

AN/-