- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26141 WP No. 13972 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13972 OF 2026 (T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S RAMKY SPECIALIYT CHEMICALS AND EQUIPMENT (A PROPRIETARY CONCERN REGISTERED UNDER THE ERSTWHILE PROVISION OF KARNATAKA VALUE ADDED TAX, 2004 SUBSEQUENTLY MIGRATED INTO GST REGIME WITH REGISTRATION NO 29ADJPV2183K1ZU) NO. 730, KAUSTHUBHA, 2ND FLOOR, 18TH MAIN, PADMANABHANAGAR, BENGALURU PIN CODE 560070 (REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR SHRI. VAJRALA RAM KRISHNA S/O. SUBBA RAMIAH VAJRALA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS) …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH D., ADVOCATE) AND: THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX., Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26141 WP No. 13972 of 2026 WEST DIVISION - 5, GST WEST COMMISSIONERATE, BMTC BUILDING, FIRST FLOOR, BANASHANKARI, KANAKAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU 560 070 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ARAVIND V. CHAVAN, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL NO. 140/2022- 23-SERVICE TAX DATED 28.12.2022/29.12.2022 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE -B; REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE RESPONDENT FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER AFFORDING THE PETITIONER A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT FACTS AND LEGAL POSITION, INCLUDING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST V. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX DATED 03.07.2024, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE - C. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26141 WP No. 13972 of 2026 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the Order-in- Original dated 28.12.2022/29.12.2022 under the Finance Act, 1994 [for short, 'the Act']. The petitioner cannot dispute that this is an order that could be appealed under Section 107 of the Act, but the petitioner has invoked this Court's jurisdiction relying upon the judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench 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. 2. Mr. Prakash D, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the impugned Order-in- Original is an ex parte order without due service of notice and is based on an information furnished by the Income Tax Department acting under an agreement signed between the Central Board for Direct Taxes and the Central Board for Indirect Taxes - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26141 WP No. 13972 of 2026 but without due opportunity. The learned counsel argues that in very similar circumstances based on an undertaking given by the concerned from the department, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has disposed of the writ petition in W.P.No.11154/2023 and other matters [such as in W.P.No.20351/2024] restoring the proceedings for reconsideration with due opportunity. 3. Mr. Aravind V. Chavan, a learned Standing counsel who is called upon to accept notice for the respondent, is heard and when queried, the learned counsel submits that the undertaking as recorded in W.P.No.11154/2023 was to ensure that the designated officers looked into complaints of similar nature but with march of time, the jurisdictional Officer, such as the respondent in the present case, is empowered to extend an opportunity and decide on the merits of the cause that could be shown. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26141 WP No. 13972 of 2026 4. This Court finds that the outcome in the writ petition must turn in the light of the afore circumstances notwithstanding the fact that the petition is filed almost after three years from the date of the impugned order because the petitioner asserts that it has not been served with notice or been extended an opportunity otherwise, and more importantly, the petitioner proposes to rely upon the statutory provisions to contend that the subject transaction does not result in any consequence to pay certain taxes. This Court finds that all these circumstances must be considered before a liability is fastened on the petitioner. Hence the following: ORDER [A] The petition is allowed-in-part and the impugned Order-in-Original dated 28.12.2022/29.12.2022 [Annexure - B] is quashed restoring the proceedings to the respondent for reconsideration. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26141 WP No. 13972 of 2026 [B] The petitioner shall, without further notice, file response, if any, with the respondent by 22.06.2026 even without waiting for a certified copy of this order. [C] The respondent shall consider all the circumstances without non-suiting the petitioner on the ground of delay. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE RB