Writ interference with authorised VAT proceedings denied where allegations against officials lacked a clear factual foundation.

Article 226 writ jurisdiction will not be used to supervise or stall duly authorised departmental proceedings under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 where the survey at the assessee's premises was authorised by the competent authority. Mere allegations against officials, without a clear evidentiary foundation, were insufficient to justify quashing the proceedings or directing an investigation into the handling of the assessee's complaint or the department's internal functioning. Allegations relating to customs officials were also held irrelevant to interference with the VAT proceedings. The departmental action was therefore allowed to continue in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court should interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash or investigate departmental proceedings initiated under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 on the basis of allegations against officials and a complaint said to have been made by the assessee.

Analysis: The proceedings initiated by the Commercial Taxes Department were supported by material showing that the survey at the petitioner's business premises under section 52 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was duly authorised by the competent authority. The Court held that it had no supervisory jurisdiction to direct an investigation into the handling of the assessee's complaint or into the internal functioning of the department. Mere allegations against officials, without a sufficient evidentiary foundation, were not enough to invoke writ jurisdiction to quash the proceedings. The Court also declined to treat allegations relating to customs officials as a basis for interfering with the VAT proceedings.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not fit for interference and the departmental proceedings were permitted to continue in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a clear legal or factual foundation, the writ court will not exercise Article 226 jurisdiction to supervise, investigate, or stall duly authorised departmental proceedings on the basis of mere allegations against officials.

---