IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.P.No.3071/2019 (T – RES) BETWEEN :
MAXWORTH REALTY INDIA LTD., A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT KMP HOUSE, No.12/2, YAMUNA BAI ROAD, MADHAVANAGAR, BENGALURU-560001 REP. BY DIRECTOR K.KESAVA ...PETITIONER (BY SRI M.VINAYA KEERTHY, ADV.) AND :
JT. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX BENGALURU-NORTH COMMISSIONERATE HMT BHAVAN, GANGANAGAR BENGALURU-560 032. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT.VANAJA M.R., ADV.) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUNGED ORDER DATED 04.05.2018 ANNEXURE-D PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 04.05.2018 passed by the respondent relating to the period January 2013 to March 2014 whereby the service provided by the petitioner–M/s. Maxworth Realty India Limited has been classified as service under Section 65-B (44)/’taxable service’ under Section 65B(51) of the Finance Act, 1994.
2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that by virtue of the order dated 5.1.2018 passed under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code by the National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru Branch, moratorium was declared for the purpose of Section 14 of the Code in respect of the petitioner’s company and one Sri.Ravi Sankar Devarkonda was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) to carry out the functions as mentioned under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The said order or moratorium was set aside by the NCLAT vide order dated 18.7.2018. During the period of moratorium, the petitioner Company’s Directors had no powers to file explanation or reply to the notice issued by the Original Authority but the order impugned has been passed in the said period. Learned counsel elaborating the arguments on this point makes a fervent plea to remand the matter to the Original Authority in the interest of justice and equity, to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to put forth his explanation to the notice issued.
3. The petitioner has relied on the order of this Court in W.P.No.1016/2019 (D.D.4.7.2019).
4. In the back ground of the case as aforesaid, this Court is of the considered view that the interest of justice would be sub-served in setting aside the order impugned and remitting the proceedings to the Original Authority to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to meet the proposals made in the notice. Hence, the order impugned dated 4.5.2018 at Annexure-D is set aside and the proceedings are restored to the file of the respondent.
The petitioner shall file the objections/reply to the notice within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order and if such reply is filed, the same shall be considered by the respondent Authority in accordance with law on merits and the decision shall be taken after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in an expedite manner preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of submission of the reply/objections by the petitioner.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE Dvr: