- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42658 WP No. 18257 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.18257 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S ENCEE SERVICES (SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP FIRM) REPRESENTED BY SHRI. JOSPEH ROHIT MATHIAS, SOLE PROPRIETOR FLAT F, LAKESHORE MANOR APARTMENTS, GANGADHAR CHETTY ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 042. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. KAMMA NARAYANA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DY. COMMISSIONER CENTRAL TAX, HPU, BANGALORE NORTH COMMISSIONERATE, NO.59 HMT BHAVAN, GANGANAGAR, BELLARY ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 032. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL TAX CND3, NORTH DIVISION-3, CENTRAL TAX, NO.59 HMT BHAVAN, GANGANAGAR, BELLARY ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 032. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AKASH B. SHETTY, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ANNX-A, EX-PARTE ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL NO.10/2021-22 (ST) (ND-3) DIN- 20220357YW000000E628 DTD. 25.03.2022 RAISING A DEMAND OF RS.988,756/- ERRONEOUSLY TREATING THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FOR THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE PETITIONER IN TERMS OF SECTION 67(1) OF THE FINANCE ACT, 1994 WHICH ATTRACTED THE APPLICATION OF FORWARD CHARGE MECHANISM WHEREAS THE AMOUNT OF RS.12,78,041/- WAS Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42658 WP No. 18257 of 2025 ACTUALLY THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER TOWARDS THE SERVICES COVERED UNDER GTA WHICH ATTRACTS RCM WHICH ENTAILS THE RECIPIENT OF THE SERVICES TO PAY THE SERVICE TAX AS PER NOTIFICATION 30/2012 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “(i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing Annexure A, Ex parte Order-in-original No.10/2021-22(ST) (ND-3) DIN- 20220357YW000000E628 dated 25.03.2022 raising a demand of Rs.988,756/- erroneously treating the consideration received for the services provided by the petitioner in terms of Section 67(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 which attracted the application of Forward charge Mechanism whereas the amount of Rs.12,78,041/- was actually the consideration received by the petitioner towards the services covered under GTA which attracts RCM which entails the recipient of the services to pay the service tax as per Notification 30/2012 (Annexure-E) (ii) Remand back the matter to the respondent for reassessing the dues after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to present his case in Annexure-D dated 22.04.2025. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42658 WP No. 18257 of 2025 (iii) Grant such other relief that the Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. A perusal of material on record will indicate that the 1st respondent issued a show-cause notice dated 31.12.2020 under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 alleging that the service value of certain goods declared in service tax returns for F.Y. 2015-16 did not match with that of the service value declared in Income Tax return. Since the petitioner did not submit his reply to the said show-cause notice, the 1st respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 25.03.2022 under Section 73(9) of the CGST Act, 2017 confirming the total demand of Rs.9,88,756 /- including the tax, interest and penalty. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said notices were sent to the petitioner’s e-mail id and the same went unnoticed by the petitioner. So also, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said notices were sent to the petitioner during Covid-19 pandemic and therefore, the petitioner could not - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42658 WP No. 18257 of 2025 approach his Tax Consultant and hence, couldn't submit replies / documents to neither the reminder notice nor the show-cause notice under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 and resultantly, couldn’t contest the proceedings. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner having no option has approached this Court by way of the present petition interalia contending that the inability and omission on the part of the petitioner to submit reply to the reminder notice and show-cause notice and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause and submits that if one more opportunity is provided, by setting aside the impugned order, the petitioner would submit a reply to the show-cause notice and contest the proceedings. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. Though several contentions have been urged by both sides, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said notices went un-noticed by the petitioner and the fact that the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42658 WP No. 18257 of 2025 petitioner did not file its reply / documents culminated in the impugned ex-parte order. 7. Under these circumstances, having regard to the specific assertion on the part of the petitioner that his inability and omission to submit replies and contest the proceedings was due to bonafide reasons, unavoidable circumstances and sufficient cause, I deem it just and appropriate to adopt a justice oriented approach and provide one more opportunity to the petitioner by setting aside the impugned order at Annexure – A dated 25.03.2022 by remitting the matter back to the 1st respondent for reconsideration of the matter afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting reply to the impugned show-cause notice dated 26.12.2020. 8. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER (i) The petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order at Annexure – A dated 25.03.2022 passed by the 1st respondent under 73(9) of the CGST Act, 2017 is hereby set aside. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42658 WP No. 18257 of 2025 (iii) The matter is remitted back to the 1st respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law from the stage of petitioner submitting its reply to the notice dated 26.12.2020 issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 at Annexure –B. (iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the 1st respondent on 02.12.2025 without awaiting further notice from the 1st respondent. (v) The liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit replies, documents etc., which shall be considered by the first respondent who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear them and proceed further in accordance with law. (vi) In the event, the petitioner does not appear before the 1st respondent on 02.12.2025 as stated supra, present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 30