Natural justice and alternate remedy rule permit writ review where a penalty is imposed without a fair hearing.

Availability of a statutory revision did not bar writ jurisdiction where the penalty order was challenged for breach of natural justice and denial of hearing. The High Court held that an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar when the grievance concerns violation of natural justice or an action said to be without jurisdiction, and it found that the authority proceeded without giving the assessee the requested opportunity to object. The penalty order was therefore unsustainable, was quashed, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after affording a fair hearing.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the availability of a statutory revision barred exercise of writ jurisdiction when the impugned penalty order was alleged to have been passed in breach of natural justice; (ii) whether the penalty order levying tax penalty without granting the requested opportunity of hearing could stand.

Issue (i): whether the availability of a statutory revision barred exercise of writ jurisdiction when the impugned penalty order was alleged to have been passed in breach of natural justice.

Analysis: The availability of an alternative statutory remedy is not an absolute bar to writ jurisdiction. Where the grievance concerns enforcement of fundamental rights, violation of natural justice, or an order said to be without jurisdiction, the High Court may entertain the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The request for time to file objections had been made before the penalty order was passed, and the authority proceeded to decide the matter without affording a fair hearing.

Conclusion: The writ remedy was maintainable notwithstanding the revision remedy, and the objection based on alternate remedy failed.

Issue (ii): whether the penalty order levying tax penalty without granting the requested opportunity of hearing could stand.

Analysis: The authority rejected the request for time and issued the penalty order almost simultaneously, without hearing the assessee on the show-cause notice. Such a course was treated as a denial of fair hearing and as contrary to the principles of natural justice. Since the order was passed without affording the opportunity specifically sought, it could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The penalty order was quashed and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after giving opportunity of objection and hearing.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the order of the Single Judge and the penalty order were set aside, and the matter was sent back for decision afresh after compliance with natural justice.

Ratio Decidendi: An alternate statutory remedy does not bar writ jurisdiction where the impugned action is taken in breach of natural justice or without affording a fair hearing, and an order so passed is liable to be quashed.

---