- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16269 WP No. 3152 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 3152 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S SRI DATTA SAI SECURITY ENTERPRISES REPRESENTED BY SHRI VENKATARAMAPPA NAGESH NARLURL AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS BEARING GSTIN 29ADRPN6325RIZG BEARING SERVICE TAX ADRPN6325R BEARING PAN ADRPN6325R NO 3/1, SASTHA NILAYAM, 12 CROSS, 1 STAGE, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 038 (PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. HARISH VASHISTH.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, OFFICE OF PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX BENGALURU EAST, TTMC/BMTC, DOMLUR, BANGALURU - 560 071, 2. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX OFFICE OF PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, BENGALURU EAST, TTMC/BMTC, DOMLUR, BANGALURU - 560 071. 3. BANK MANAGER (BRANCH) BANK OF BARODA, 35 CHM ROAD, INDIRANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 038 …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16269 WP No. 3152 of 2026 (BY SRI. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI, OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT TO QUASH THE EX-PARTE ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL NO.200/JC/B-EAST/2022, DATED 22.09.2022, OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX (RESPONDENT-4), ATTACHED AS ARISING OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE (SCN) NO.44/2021-22/JC, DATED 24.04.2022, HEREWITH PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A OR IN ALTERNATE AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to set aside the ex-parte order-in-original dated 22.09.2022 at Annexure–A. 2. The petitioner has also sought for issuance of writ of mandamus by way of direction to re-do the adjudication afresh after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the impugned order raising a demand upon adjudication regarding service tax by passing an order under Section 73(2) of the Finance Act, 1994, was based on information - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16269 WP No. 3152 of 2026 provided by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), and in similar matters, this Court has been remitting the matter back for reconsideration in certain directions as has been done in W.P.No.11154/2023. 4. It is submitted that on the same ground, the matter may be remitted back for reconsideration. 5. It is specifically asserted that the demand raised by virtue of adjudication is not legally tenable as service rendered would come outside the purview of taxability by virtue of exemption claimed that could be traced back to the notification No.25/2012. 6. It is further submitted that the order passed was an ex-parte order and the petitioner, if afforded an opportunity, would demonstrate the service to be exempt. 7. Perused the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected petitions. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16269 WP No. 3152 of 2026 8. This Court while disposing of the said petitions by remanding it to the stage of reply to the show cause notice had made certain observations to be kept in mind by the concerned officials. The observations made from para-10 onwards 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. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16269 WP No. 3152 of 2026 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 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." 9. It is not in dispute that the Order in Appeal is a mere order of dismissal of appeal due to non-compliance of statutory requirement of pre-deposit. The order of adjudication itself requires reconsideration taking note of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16269 WP No. 3152 of 2026 the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected petitions, the relevant portions of which are extracted hereinabove. 10. Accordingly, the order-in-original dated 22.09.2022 at Annexure-A is set aside. The matter is remitted to the stage of reply to the show cause notice. The Authorities to take note of the observations made in the order dated 03.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.11154/2023 and connected petitions as extracted supra, in specific, to the observations at para-10 of the order as may be applicable. 11. Needless to state, the petitioner is at liberty to make out a fresh reply to the show cause notice. 12. The petitioner to appear before respondent No.1 without further notice on 21.04.2026. 13. In light of setting aside of the order-in-original, the amount recovered pursuant to the impugned order at - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16269 WP No. 3152 of 2026 Annexure-A is subject to outcome of the adjudication as directed. 14. Needless to state, in light of setting aside the order at Annexure – A, the bank attachment issued for the purpose of recovery is to be rescinded forthwith by the respondent-Authority, 15. All other contentions are kept open. 16. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. 17. The respondent-Authority may expedite the adjudication. SD/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE KTY List No.: 3 Sl No.: 6