AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 59
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vate Limited, Chennai. The said goods were despatched on 25.10.2012, through M/s. Instant Delivery Systems Pvt. Ltd., (Courier Agent) along with CST Bill No.4 dated 25.10.2012 for a sum of Rs. 13,52,000/-. When the aforesaid Clearing Agent was carrying on the goods, officers of the 2nd respondent inspected the consignment and issued goods detention Notice No.17 dated 26.10.2012 to M/s. RTL Mobiles, directing them to pay a sum of Rs. 7,30,800/- as tax and penalty under TNVAT Act. Subsequently, M/s. RTL Mobiles Private Limited terminated the Purchase Order, along with a copy of the communication dated 03.11.2012 and the said termination order was communicated to the 2nd respondent department. It was also informed to the 2nd respondent that since they did not receive the goods on time, they have cancelled the purchase order, and therefore all the detained goods be returned to the appellant. Inspite of the request made by the appellant, the 2nd respondent did not return the goods. Hence, narrating the facts, a representation dated 05.11.2012 was sent to the 2nd respondent by the appellant. The appellant specifically stated that the 2nd respondent has no jurisdiction to detain the consi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....el for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material available on records. 8. The appellant has filed W.P. No. 32565 of 2012, challenging the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in GD No. 17/2012 dated 26.11.2012. This Court has passed an order directing the appellant to pay the disputed tax of Rs. 2,43,600/- under protest, for release of the detained goods and permitted the petitioner to file an appeal within 30 days time, from the date of receipt of the said order. Further, the appellant was directed to furnish appropriate security for the compounding fee levied to a sum of Rs. 4,87,200/- at the time of release of goods and an order of interim stay, in so far as the composition fee is concerned, pending disposal of the appeal, was granted by this Court. Challenging the said order, the appellant has filed the present appeal. By order dated 08.02.2013, in M.P. No.1 of 2012, this Court has modified the order and permitted the appellant to furnish a Bank Guarantee for a sum of Rs. 7,30,800/- to the credit of the Writ Appeal, within a period of one week from that date and on furnishing the same, the respondents were directed to release t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ayam vs. The Income Tax Officer, Kottayam reported in 1961 AIR 609 : 1961 SCR (2) 765, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the appellant could not be permitted to invoke the jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India when he had adequate remedy open to him by way of appeal to the Tribunal. (c) In Punjab National Bank vs. O.C.Krishnan and others reported in 2001 Supp (1) SCR 466, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the Act has been enacted with a view to provide a special procedure for recovery of debts due to the banks and the financial institutions. There is a hierarchy of appeal provided in the Act, namely, filing of an appeal under section 20 and this last track procedure cannot be allowed to be derailed either by taking recourse to proceedings under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution or by filing a civil suit, which is expressly barred. Even though a provision court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, nevertheless when there is an alternative remedy available judicial prudence demands that the court refrains from exercising its jurisdiction under the said constitutional provisions. This was a case where the Hig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt will not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective alternative remedy is available to the aggrieved person or the statute under which the action complained of has been taken itself contains a mechanism for redressal of grievance still holds the field. Therefore, when a statutory forum is created by law for redressal of grievances, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation. 16. In the instant case, the Act provides complete machienry for the assessment/reassessment of tax, imposition of penalty and for obtaining relief in respect of any improper orders passed by the Revenue Authorities, and the assessee could not be permitted to abandon that machinery and to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution when he had adequate remedy open to him by an appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 17. In the instant case, neither has the writ petitioner assessee described the available alternate remedy under the Act as ineffectual and non-efficacious while invoking the writ jurisdiction of the High Court nor has the High Court ascribed cogent and satisfactory reasons to....