Case Law Details
Arjun Chettri Vs Union of India & Ors. (Calcutta High Court)
In the case of Arjun Chettri vs Union of India & Ors., the petitioner, a registered taxpayer with multiple service tax registrations, challenged the duplicate tax demand for the period 2017-18. The petitioner was initially served with an Order-in-Original on 22.02.2023 for two service tax registrations, which was later followed by a similar order on 01.11.2023 for a third registration number. Both orders raised identical demands for the same transactions and period. The petitioner argued that the subsequent order was unjustified as it repeated the same liabilities, resulting in duplicative tax demands for the same transactions.
The petitioner had already appealed the earlier order before the appellate authority, but with the second order issued based on identical information, the matter was brought before the Calcutta High Court. The Revenue argued that no appeal had been filed against the later order and the petitioner had approached the court belatedly. However, the Court found that the second order was a duplicate of the first and could not be justified. The Court quashed the order dated 01.11.2023, ordering the unfreezing of the petitioner’s bank accounts and directing the authorities to reconsider the matter. It was also noted that the petitioner had made the necessary pre-deposit. The case illustrates the importance of ensuring that tax demands are not duplicated and that taxpayers are not subjected to procedural harassment.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
The present writ petitioner is registered with the service tax authorities under multiple registration numbers, namely:
“AETPC6283QSD001,” “AETPC6283QSD002,” “AETPC6283QSD003,”and “AETPC6283QSD004,” all of which are linked to the petitioner’s Permanent Account Number (PAN) “AETPC6283Q.”
The petitioner has challenged the Order-in-Original bearing number 113/AC/CGST/SLG-DIV/2023-24, passed by respondent no. 2 on 01.11.2023, annexed in the writ petition as Annexure “P/12.” Additionally, the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of prohibition, restraining the respondents from proceeding with the Show Cause-cum-Demand Notice against registration number AETPC6283QSD004 for the period 2017-18 (up to June 2017). The petitioner has also sought directions upon the respondents to unfreeze the petitioner’s bank accounts bearing numbers 441010100026567, 361502000000033, and 361501000008105.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Order-in-Original dated 01.11.2023, issued by respondent no. 2 concerning service tax registration number “AETPC6283QSD003” for the period 2017-18, is entirely illegal and ought to be quashed, as it is a duplicate of the Order-in-Original dated 22.02.2023, previously issued by respondent no. 2 for service tax registration numbers “AETPC6283QSD001” and “AETPC6283QSD002” for the same period.
It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent authorities initially passed a combined order on 22.02.2023 for service tax registration numbers “AETPC6283QSD001” and “AETPC6283QSD002,” based on the same set of information received from the Income Tax Department. However, in a wholly unjustified manner, respondent no. 2 subsequently issued the impugned order dated 01.11.2023, raising an identical demand for service tax registration number “AETPC6283QSD003” for the same set of transactions and the same period. The petitioner argues that while the registration numbers differ, the liabilities and allegations remain identical, leading to duplicative tax liabilities and procedural harassment.
It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that they have already challenged the Order-in-Original dated 22.02.2023 before the first appellate authority, which dismissed the appeal on 12.08.2024, thereby confirming the demand. Against the said order, the petitioner filed a second appeal before the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, which remains pending. However, due to the repetitive and duplicative nature of the order dated 01.11.2023, which is based on the same information and transactions for the same financial year, the petitioner has been compelled to seek relief directly before this Hon’ble Court.
Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue submits that the petitioner has not preferred any appeal against the Order-in-Original dated 01.11.2023. It is further contended that no Show Cause Notice has been issued against registration number “AETPC6283QSD004” for the period 2017-18 (up to June 2017). The Revenue also argues that the petitioner has approached this Court belatedly instead of availing the statutory remedies available. Additionally, it is submitted that the petitioner is a non-filer and, therefore, should not be granted any leniency.
Upon hearing both parties and perusing the materials on record, this Court finds that the Order-in-Original dated 01.11.2023 is entirely identical to the Order-in-Original dated 22.02.2023, as both pertain to the same information and the same transactions for the same period.
In my considered view, since the petitioner’s second appeal is pending before the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata, against the order dated 12.08.2024, which confirmed the Order-in-Original dated 22.02.2023, the Revenue cannot be permitted to raise identical demands based on the same information and the same transactions for the same period more than once.
Accordingly, the Order-in-Original bearing number 113/AC/CGST/SLG-DIV/2023-24, passed by respondent no. 2 on 01.11.2023, and annexed in the writ petition as Annexure “P/12,” is hereby quashed and set aside.
Since the petitioner has already deposited the requisite pre-deposit of 10% of the demand amount against the Order-in-Original for the period 2017-18, amounting to ₹1,09,108/-, this Court directs the respondent authorities to unfreeze the petitioner’s following bank accounts, namely:
Savings Bank Account No. 441010100026567 held with Axis Bank, Rangpo Branch. Current Account No. 361502000000033 held with Indian Overseas Bank, Dabgram Branch. Savings Bank Account No. 361501000008105 held with Indian Overseas Bank, Dabgram Branch.
The Revenue is at liberty to reconsider the matter afresh in light of the discussions made hereinabove, if so advised, in accordance with the law.
Since the Revenue has not filed any affidavit in this matter, the allegations made in this petition shall be deemed to have been denied by them.
Accordingly, WPA 2415 of 2024 is disposed of.
Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.
Author Bio
