AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 971
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xable turn over of Rs. 34,75,535/- and Rs. 34,70,870/- for the Assessment Year 2002-03 and Rs. 42,625/- for the Assessment Year 2005-06, respectively under the erstwhile Tamilnadu General Sales Tax Act, 1954. Verification of the accounts revealed that local purchase of dyes and chemicals were used in the process. Assessment were made under Section 3H and levied tax at 1%, under the abovesaid Section. 3. Placing reliance on a decision of this Court in State of Tamil Nadu Vs. SSM Processing Mills reported in 69 VST 445 (Madras), Commercial Tax Officer, Periya Agraharam Circle, Erode, Erode District, 2nd respondent herein issued notices dated 07.09.2004 and 02.06.2017, respectively. 4. Responding to the same, assessee contended that in the said decision, it was held that chemicals used in execution of Works Contract for dyeing cloth, would not at attract sales tax, in view of the fact that the chemicals used for bleaching were washed away in the process. Rejecting the said contention, respondent passed orders dated 02.06.2017 & 27.07.2017, respectively, under Section 16(1) of the Tamilnadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 in TNGST No.3075094/02-03. Similar order was passed for the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....writ petitions are dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file appeals against the impugned orders if so advised. In the event of such appeals being filed, the appellate authority shall exclude the period from 18.09.2017 till the receipt of the certified copy of this order while computing limitation. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed." 7. Aggrieved by the abovesaid orders, instant writ appeals are filed on the following grounds. (i) The learned Single Judge ought to have seen that the petitioner was assessed by the respondent by taxing the turnover of the petitioner involving dyes and chemicals which are used in the processing of textile products. The petitioner had objected to the proposal as far back as 2004 itself. However, the respondent proceeded to raise demand on the petitioner holding that the law regarding the taxability of such turnover was settled by the Hon'ble High Court in State of Tamil Nadu Vs. SSM Processing Mills 2014 69 VST 455. The petitioner only recently came to know that the assess in the said case has preferred a Special Leave Petition against the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in SL....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an alternative remedy is not a bar for this Hon'ble Court to entertain writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. (iv). Further, the learned single judge failed to see that the respondent's assessment order suffers from non application of mind. While it is true that this Hon'ble Court in the case of M/s.S.S.M. Processing Mills held that material involved in dyeing and bleaching are taxable under Section 3(B) of the TNGST Act. It is not stated in the judgment as to how the turnover involved in such processes should be computed. It is not permissible to take the entire turnover and tax the same as has been done by the respondent. The turnover will have to be computed in terms of Section 3(B)(2)(E) of the TNGST Act. More importantly, the respondent has levied penalty on the petitioner for failure to pay tax on its turnover involved in dyeing and bleaching. However, this Hon'ble Court in the very same judgment in M/s.S.S.M.Processing Mills in [2014] 69 VST 445 (Mad.) has held that no penalty is leviable since there is no suppression of turnover and the entire issue is only turns on the interpretation of the statutory provision. Hence, the iss....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd, for the reason that it is the turnover, which is assessed. 13. Further from the perusal of the judgment of State of Tamilnadu Vs. Vanavil Colours, reported in (2017) 104 VST 309 (Madras), it could be seen that levy of tax has been sustained, but, penalty alone has been cancelled, following a decision in Jansons Textile Process case. 14. Vide common order in W.P.No.21532 and 21533 of 2017 dated 12.10.2017 impugned in the instant appeals, while dismissing the writ petitions, writ Court has granted liberty to the assessee / appellant to file appeals against the assessment orders, if so advised and in such an event, while computing limitation directed the appellate authority to exclude the period from 18.09.2017, till the receipt of the certified copy of the common order made in the writ petitions. 15. Now that a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Vanavil Colours case, has confirmed liability to pay tax. However, deleted penalty. 16. Statute provides for an appeal. On more than one occasion, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as well as this court, held that, ordinarily, writ petitions should not be entertained, when statutes provide for an effective and alternativ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....verlooked the settled law that the High Court will ordinarily not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective remedy is available to the aggrieved person and that this rule applies with greater rigour in matters involving recovery of taxes, cess, fees, other types of public money and the dues of banks and other financial institutions. In our view, while dealing with the petitions involving challenge to the action taken for recovery of the public dues, etc., the High Court must keep in mind that the legislations enacted by Parliament and State Legislatures for recovery of such dues are a code unto themselves inasmuch as they do not only contain comprehensive procedure for recovery of the dues but also envisage constitution of quasi-judicial bodies for redressal of the grievance of any aggrieved person. Therefore, in all such cases, the high Court must insist that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies available under the relevant statute. 44. While expressing the aforesaid view, we are conscious that the powers conferred upon the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e, or has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed, or when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice, the proposition laid down in Thansingh Nathmal Case {Thansigh Nathmal Vs. Supt. of Taxes, AIR 1964 SC 1419}, Titaghur Paper Mills Case {Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Ltd Vs. State of Orissa (1983) 2 SCC 433} and other similar judgments that the High Court 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 crated 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 machinery 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 Arti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....igh Court under Article 226 is one of the basic essential features of the Constitution and any legislation including the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 cannot override or curtail jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (Refer: L.Chandrakumar Vs. Union of India (1997) 3 SCC 261 and S.N.Mukherjee Vs. Union of India (1990) 4 SCC 594. (ii). The jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 and this Court under Article 32 though cannot be circumscribed by the provisions of any enactment, they will certainly have due regard to the legislative intent evidenced by the provisions of the Acts and would exercise their jurisdiction consistent with the provisions of the Act (Refer: Mafatlal Industries Ltd., Vs. Union of India (1997) 5 SC 536. (iii). When a statutory forum is created by law for redressal of grievances, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation. (Refer: Nivedita Sharma Vs. Cellular Operators Assn. of India (2011) 14 SCC 337. (iv). The High Court will not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective alternative remedy is available to the aggrieved ....