Full disclosure in writ jurisdiction: suppression of prior revisional proceedings barred challenge to the reassessment notice.

A petitioner seeking Article 226 relief must make full and candid disclosure of all material facts and prior proceedings. Here, the writ challenge to a reassessment notice under Section 36(1) of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 was undermined because the petitioner suppressed earlier suo motu revisional proceedings under Section 70(1) and the revisional order directing fresh reassessment, while also failing to challenge that foundational order. The Court treated this suppression as a lack of clean hands and refused discretionary writ relief without entering into the merits of the reassessment challenge.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the reassessment notice was maintainable in view of the petitioner's suppression of the prior suo motu revisional proceedings and related order.

Analysis: The writ petition assailed the notice issued under Section 36(1) of the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004 on limitation grounds, but the petitioner did not disclose the earlier suo motu revision initiated under Section 70(1) of the same Act, in which it had participated, and the revisional order directing fresh reassessment. In writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, full and candid disclosure of all material facts is mandatory. A party who withholds relevant proceedings and seeks to challenge a consequential notice without challenging the foundational revisional order does not approach the Court with clean hands. Such suppression justified refusal of discretionary relief without examining the reassessment challenge on merits.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed for suppression of material facts and lack of clean hands.

Final Conclusion: Discretionary writ relief was denied because the petitioner concealed material prior proceedings connected with the impugned reassessment process.

Ratio Decidendi: A petitioner invoking writ jurisdiction must make full and frank disclosure of all material facts and prior proceedings; suppression of such facts disentitles the petitioner to discretionary relief.

---