2018 (7) TMI 1267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....his case and further, the input tax was also reversed as far as the petitioner is concerned. Under these circumstances, the order deserves to be scrapped. 4.The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent opposed the contention by stating that the authority competent is empowered to take up the revision of the orders already passed and the impugned order is one such wherein certain discrepancies were found in assessment and accordingly, the matter was taken up by way of revision and after affording an opportunity to the writ petitioner to submit his explanation/objections, the revised orders were passed by the competent authority in proceedings dated 19.09.2016,11.01.2017,21.10.2016, 12.06.2018. 5.When this Court asked the question with the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner, why the petitioner has not preferred an appeal? The learned counsel replied by stating that in the event of preferring an appeal, the petitioner has to deposit 25% of the demanded amount. Further, when the learned counsel is of an opinion that the very issuance of the orders itself is untenable, he can very well prefer a writ petition before this Court under Arti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T Act . Thus, the writ petitioner has to prefer an appeal. All the contentions including the ground raised that the orders of rejection is non-speaking, shall be raised before the Appellate Authority. 9.The functions of the Appellate Authority under  the TNVAT Act  is quasi judicial in nature. They are empowered to conduct the proceedings by summoning the persons or calling for the documents or otherwise. Thus, the writ petitioner has to prefer an appeal against the order of revision, which is impugned in these present writ petitions. Contrarily, the present writ petitions has been filed in order to evade the deposit of 25% of the demanded amount for preferring an appeal. The writ petitions cannot be entertained for this purpose and by wavering the right for preferring an appeal provided under the statutes. 10.This apart, in respect of W.P.Nos.17066 & 17068 of 2018, the orders impugned has been passed by the authority on 19.09.2016 & 21.10.2016 and the present writ petitions have been filed on 5th July 2018, after a lapse of about two years. Thus, these writ petitions itself are liable to be rejected on the ground of laches. 11.This Court is of a strong opinion that in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ficacious alternative remedy is available to any aggrieved person. (See Sadhana Lodh v. National Insurance Co. Ltd.; Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai and SBI v. Allied Chemical Laboratories.) 3. Commissioner of Income Tax and Ors. v. ChhabilDass Agarwal, MANU/SC/0802/2013 : 2014 (1) SCC 603, as follows: Para 15. while it can be said that this Court has recognised some exceptions to the Rule of alternative remedy i.e. where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment in question, or in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial procedure, 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 ThansinghNathmal case, Titaghur Paper Mills case 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 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to an alternative remedy has nothing to do with the jurisdiction of the case, normally the High Court should not interfere if there is an adequate efficacious alternative remedy. If somebody approaches the High Court without availing the alternative remedy provided the High Court should ensure that he has made out a strong case or that there exist good grounds to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction. 6. K.S. Rashid and Sons v. Income Tax Investigation Commission and Ors., AIR (1954) SC 207; Sangram Singh v. Election Tribunal, Kotah and Ors., AIR (1955) SC 425; Union of India v. T.R. Varma, AIR (1957) SC 882; State of U.P. and Ors. v. Mohammad Nooh, AIR (1958) SC 86 and M/s K.S. Venkataraman and Co. (P) Ltd. v. State of Madras, AIR (1966) SC 1089, Constitution Benches of the Supreme Court held that Article 226 of the Constitution confers on all the High Courts a very wide power in the matter of issuing writs. However, the remedy of writ is an absolutely discretionary remedy and the High Court has always the discretion to refuse to grant any writ if it is satisfied that the aggrieved party can have an adequate or suitable relief elsewhere. The Court, in extraordinary circumstance....