TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 425
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nciples of natural justice, while passing the impugned order by, (i) not giving specific proposition notice while applying G.P.rate and the additions made in the impugned order. (ii) that the details in question were furnished before the Assessing Authority well in advance and without applying his mind to the same, he has passed the impugned order. (iii) that certain audit reports were also relied upon by the Assessing Authority, without confronting that material to the petitioner-assessee. He also relied upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Paharpur Cooling Towers Limited, Bangalore Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes & another reported in 2015(82) Kar.L.J.152(DB). 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at some length at the admission stage, this Court is satisfied that the present writ petitions are not maintainable and deserve to be dismissed on the ground of an effective alternative remedy available to the petitioner under Section 62 of the KVAT Act, 2003, against the impugned orders assailed before this Court in the present writ petitions. 5. It is not the case of the petitioner that no notice was ever served upon t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....before the Assessing Authority are not fully explained, then even before making a best judgment assessment by estimation of the turnover and imposing tax thereon by applying the gross profit ratio rate, even that is also first specifically required to be notified to him in advance or that certain materials which are available on the record of the Assessing Authority like Audit report, has also to be specifically notified to him, so as to take his response thereto on record. But this is not what the breach of principles of natural justice on the part of the assessing authority is. But this is really a breach of duty on the part of assessee to fully cooperate in the assessment proceedings and satisfy the assessing authority on all the relevant aspects of the documents, details of returns filed by him and to rebut the adverse material against him. 9. There are specific timeframes for passing of the Assessment orders and once the assessee has participated in the assessment proceedings upon given a notice and he has attended to those proceedings, he is expected to co-operate and explain all the points raised against him by the Assessing Authority during the course of such assessment pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the assessment order cannot be allowed to be wasted for the case of the petitioner-assessee on the purported ground of breach of natural justice which is only flimsy ground raised by invoking the writ jurisdiction. The same does not entitle the petitioner- assessee to bypass and ignore regular appellate remedies provided in the law for this purpose. 13. Law, it is said, is a notorious laggard. It does not reach out as science does. It follows social consensus which is itself behind the need of the times. The mantle of omniscience and infallibility i.e., supposed to descend on a judicial court by reason of its constitutional status alone is a worn-out cliché. This is amply proven by the state of the superior constitutional courts today. Litigations linger on for generations. It is the result of unscientific, non-productive, petrified procedures and a history of wasted judicial time over routine non-judicial repetitive motions in courts without any value addition to the decision-making process. The courts would be committing, unthinking & unilateral, disarmament against acclaimed injustice. Each court has its own peculiar problems and needs specially tailored case-flow ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....considered by the Assessing Authority without being confronted to the assessee and the Assessment Authority had not applied his mind judiciously to the same. With great respects, even if on its own facts, the Writ appeal came to be allowed by the Division Bench of this Court, that cannot be treated as a binding precedent for mandatory entertaining of such writ petitions in all the cases upon such an allegations, even though the Court comes to the conclusion otherwise that an enquiry into complex facts is required to be made by the fact finding appellate forums prescribed under the law. It is a judgment in persona applicable to the case before the court only in that and is not a judgment in rem applicable in all such other cases, where a discretion about entertaining the writ petition is available to the Court. There cannot be any color matching comparison of such cases and this case is not found to be on all fours with the case in hands. 18. In the present case, the petitioner-assessee has contended before the Court that certain documents, details and purchase registers etc., were produced before the Assessing Authority which were not analysed and discussed by him and a specific p....