- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36060 WP No. 18724 of 2025 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. 18724 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: SHEEBA COMPUTERS A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI BALARAJU S/O SHRI C.V. HANUMANTHA REDDY AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 148 4TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, HAL 3RD STAGE NEW TIPPASANDRA BENGALURU – 560 075. …PETITIONER (BY SRI PRADYUMNA HEJIB, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX (IN SITU) DIVISION-5, BENGALURU EAST COMMISSIONERATE, TTMC-BMTC COMPLEX HAL AIRPORT ROAD, DOMMALURU BENGALURU – 560 071. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36060 WP No. 18724 of 2025 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, DIVISION-5, BENGALURU EAST COMMISSIONERATE TTMC-BMTC COMPLEX HAL AIRPORT ROAD, DOMMALURU BENGALURU – 560 071. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ARAVIND V.CHAVAN, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH IMPUGNED ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL BEARING NO. 410/2022-23/DC (DIN 20230257YT0000712525) DATED 27.02.2023 (ANNEXURE - A) PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT; (B) QUASH THE RECOVERY NOTICE BEARING DIN 2025035700000000E4AB DATED 25.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-B). THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36060 WP No. 18724 of 2025 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. 410/2022-23/DC [DIN 20230257YT0000712525] dated 27.02.2023 [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 DIN 2025035700000000E4AB dated 25.03.2025 issued by the Second 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 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36060 WP No. 18724 of 2025 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? 4) Whether the person is liable to remit service tax in terms of Rule 2 (1) (d) read with applicable notification? 1 (2024) 25 Centax 382 (Kar.) - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36060 WP No. 18724 of 2025 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 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 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36060 WP No. 18724 of 2025 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 bearing No.410/2022-23/DC [DIN 20230257YT0000712525] dated 27-02-2023 [Annexure-A] passed by the 1ST respondent and the recovery notice bearing No.DIN 2025035700000000E4AB dated 25-03-2025 passed by the 2nd respondent stand 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 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36060 WP No. 18724 of 2025 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 List No.: 1 Sl No.: 99