TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 298
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted 09.12.2019 bearing reference No. ITBA / AST / S / 156 / 2019-20 / 1021992539(1)' have been assailed and the same shall be collectively referred to as 'impugned orders' for the sake of convenience and clarity. 2. Mr.V.Veerapandian, learned counsel for writ petitioner notwithstanding very many averments made in the writ affidavit and very many grounds raised in the writ affidavit, in the hearing, made one focussed submission qua his campaign against the impugned orders and that one point is the writ petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 23.11.2019 fixing hearing date and time on 29.11.2019 at 10:30 AM qua assessment order 2017-18, writ petitioner went over to the Office of the first respondent but she was infor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it that the petitioner had received only the show cause notice dated 23.11.2019, for which she went personally to the office to submit her explanation but the assessing officer was on leave and hence she was informed that further communication will be sent to her fixing another date of hearing and she made signature on the register maintained by the office of assessing officer. In this regard it is submitted that the petitioner has not stated on which day and time the petitioner had visited the office of the assessing office. It is pertinent to state that the then assessing officer was very much available on the date of hearing i.e. on 29.11.2019 and the then assessing officer was not on leave at all. I do not propose to enter upon the afo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nate remedy available to the writ petitioner by way of an appeal under Section 246A of IT Act. Learned Revenue counsel also points out that it is well open to the writ petitioner to avail the alternate remedy and also make a prayer before the appellate authority to not to treat the writ petitioner as 'Assessee-in-default' and under normal circumstances, such an interim prayer is acceded to on condition that 20% of the demand should be deposited. To be noted, in the case on hand 25% of the demand has already been paid. 7. Alternate remedy rule is no doubt not an absolute rule. It is a rule of discretion. It is not only a rule of discretion, it is a self-imposed restraint qua writ jurisdiction. However, Hon'ble Supreme Court in a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nterim orders and thereafter prolong the proceedings by one device or the other. The practice certainly needs to be strongly discouraged.' (Underlining made by this Court to supply emphasis and highlight) Relevant paragraph in K.C.Mathew case is paragraph 10 and the same 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 availability of remedy to the aggrieved under Section 17 before the Tribunal and the appellate remedy under Section 18 before the Appellate Tribunal, the object and purpose of the legislation, it was observed that a writ petition ought not to be entertained ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er financial institutions to recover their dues. We hope and trust that in future the High Courts will exercise their discretion in such matters with greater caution, care and circumspection.' (underlining made by this Court to supply emphasis highlight and for ease of reference) Paragraph 10 of K.C.Mathew case extracts Satyawati Tandon principle i.e., portions of case law from Satyawati Tandon and the same has been reproduced. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to not to burden this order with extracts from Satyawati Tandon case. 8. In this regard, this Court deems it appropriate to refer to a recent judgment which was rendered by a three Member Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 03.09.2021 i.e., Commercial Steel Limited case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... exercise proceeded on the basis of surmises. However, since we are inclined to relegate the respondent to the pursuit of the alternate statutory remedy under Section 107, this Court makes no observation on the merits of the case of the respondent.' 9. To be noted, the exceptions qua alternate remedy rule are well settled vide Whirlpool principle [Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and others reported in (1998) 8 SCC 1]. These exceptions are so well settled that it has come to stay as 'Whirlpool exceptions' in litigation parlance. In the case on hand, the writ petitioner's case does not fall in any one of the exceptions, i.e., there is no violation of NJP (Natural Justice Principles) owing to the ser....