TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 1187
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and there was deemed assessment under Section 22(2) of TNVAT Act. The Enforcement Wing Officers of the respondent conducted an audit, found certain discrepancies and made a proposal. It is not in dispute that pursuant to the audit by the Enforcement Wing officials, a notice was issued to the writ petitioner and the writ petitioner sent a reply. b) Thereafter, the writ petitioner was also given an opportunity of personal hearing on 21.01.2019. Post personal hearing on 21.01.2019 granted by the respondent regarding proposal given by the Enforcement Wing for the Assessment Year 2013-14, an Assessment Order dated 23.04.2019 bearing reference TIN 33401203593/2013-14 (hereinafter 'impugned order' for brevity) came to be passed. Instant writ petition has been filed assailing the impugned order. 6. A careful perusal of the impugned order reveals the following aspects: a) Notice has been given to the writ petitioner about the proposal of enforcement wing; b) Writ petitioner has filed objections and all the objections have been considered; c) To be noted, one of the objections of the writ petitioner has been sustained by the Assessing Officer an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is of the considered view that this is an appropriate case to relegate the writ petitioner to the alternate remedy of an appeal before the aforementioned Appellate Deputy Commissioner. To be noted, with regard to exercise of writ jurisdiction notwithstanding alternate remedy, the law has crystallized over a period of time in a long line of authorities. Suffice to say that law has crystallized to the effect that alternate remedy is not an absolute rule. It is not a rule of compulsion, but it is a rule of discretion. Though it is a rule of discretion, exercise of writ jurisdiction is permissible only in cases which fall within certain exceptions. Exceptions are as follows: a) Lack of jurisdiction; b) Violation of 'natural justice principles' (NJP); c) Alternate remedy being not efficacious, or being ineffectual. 15. To be noted, the aforesaid adumbration is not exhaustive, but merely broad heads for the limited purpose of disposal of instant writ petition. In the instant case, in the considered view of this Court, in the light of the submissions of the writ petitioner, which have been set out and alluded to supra, the writ petitioner has not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the impugned order. To support her contention, learned Revenue counsel drew my attention to that part of the impugned order where one head proposed by the Enforcement wing pertaining to sale of used cars in the months of August 2013 and December 2013 and tax not being paid properly on the same has been dropped after carefully examining the bank statement that has been produced by the writ petitioner Assessee. 20. To be noted, learned counsel for writ petitioner did not argue or project Narasus Roller Flour Mills principle. Narasus Roller Flour Mills principle was not pressed into service either. However, as Madras Granites supra has been annexed to the typed-set of papers, this Court took it upon itself to consider the submissions made by learned counsel for Revenue. 21. In the light of the narrative thus far, this Court has no difficulty in accepting the submission of the learned counsel for Revenue that considering the factual matrix of the instant case, it cannot be gainsaid that there is violation of Narasus Roller Flour Mills principle. 22. The other submission, which the learned counsel for writ petitioner attempted to project was that there is violation of NJP. A c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Satyawati Tondon case [United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon and others reported in (2010) 8 SCC 110] and K.C.Mathew Case [Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore Vs. Mathew K.C. reported in (2018) 3 SCC 85]. 26. In Satyawati Tondon case, Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that rule of alternate remedy has to be construed strictly and with utmost rigour when it comes to matters relating to taxes, CESS, fees etc., In other words, rule of alternate remedy has to be construed with utmost rigour when it comes to fiscal laws in general. Learned counsel for writ petitioner is unable to project any reason whatsoever before this Court so as to say that alternate remedy adverted to above cannot be pursued in the instant case. Before this Court proceeds further, it is necessary to notice that Satyawati Tondon case has been subsequently reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.C.Mathew Case and the relevant paragraph is Paragraph 10, which reads as follows: '10. In Satyawati Tondon the High Court had restrained further proceedings under Section 13(4) of the Act. Upon a detailed consideration of the statutory scheme under the SARFAESI Act, the availabi....