Article 136 discretion bars inconsistent stand; Supreme Court declined to entertain the State's shifted plea.

Under Article 136, the Supreme Court may decline to entertain a party's new or inconsistent contention where the totality of circumstances does not justify interference. Here, the State had argued before the High Court that the returns were invalid, but in appeal sought to sustain the assessments by treating those same returns as valid. The Court refused to permit that change in stand and found it unnecessary to decide whether delayed filing or non-payment of tax rendered the returns non est under the Assam Taxation (On Goods Carried by Road or on Inland Water-ways) Act, 1961. The assessments therefore remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, the State could be permitted to advance a contention contrary to its stand before the High Court, and whether the appeals should be entertained on that basis.

Analysis: The assessment controversy arose from returns filed by the assessee under the Assam Taxation (On Goods Carried by Road or on Inland Water-ways) Act, 1961. The State had proceeded before the High Court on the footing that the returns were invalid, while in appeal it sought to sustain the assessments by treating the returns as valid. The Court declined to permit that shift in stand, emphasizing the discretionary character of its jurisdiction under Article 136 and the settled principle that interference may be refused even where an argument has some substance if the totality of circumstances does not justify it. The Court therefore found it unnecessary to decide finally whether non-payment of tax or delayed filing rendered the returns non est under Sections 7(1) and 20(2) of the Act.

Conclusion: The State was not allowed to advance the inconsistent plea, and the appeals were not entertained on that footing.

Final Conclusion: The assessments were left undisturbed in consequence of the dismissal of the appeals, without a ruling on the substantive validity of the returns.

Ratio Decidendi: In an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, the Court may refuse interference and decline to entertain a party's new or inconsistent contention if the case does not warrant the exercise of discretionary jurisdiction.

---