2024 (12) TMI 433

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, representing Sri Gadi Praveen Kumar, Deputy Solicitor General of India. 2. Heard on admission. 3. This Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution takes exception to the order dated 12.09.2023 (annexure P-1) vide Order-in-Original No. 208/2023-24-S.Tax issued by the first respondent. This assessment order is called in question in this petition directly by contending: (i) the impugned order is founded upon certain show-cause notices, which were issued beyond the statutory period of limitation of thirty months under Section 73 (1) of the Finance Act. (ii) The show-cause notices were served through E-mail whereas the Act nowhere prescribes any such mode of service through E-mai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ot the petitioner has suppressed the fact, and whether extended period of limitation can be applied or not, is a mixed question of fact and law. The Appellate Authority is the best suited to examine this aspect, as well as the aspect of procedural impropriety, violation of principles of natural justice, un-reasoned order and other aspects raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. No doubt, in the case of Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai (1998) 8 SCC 1 it was held that the Writ Petition can be entertained despite availability of statutory alternative remedy in certain situations like; i) When violation of principles of natural justice takes place. ii) When fundamental rights are breach....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... breach of natural justice, procedural impropriety, etc., can be looked into by the appellate authority also. The Apex Court in its recent judgment dated 10.04.2024 in the case of PHR Invent Educational Society Vs. UCO Bank and Others (2024) 4 S.C.R. 541 disapproved the order of Telangana High Court in W.P. No.5275 of 2021, dated 04.02.2022, wherein a Division Bench of this Court entertained a Writ Petition despite availability of alternative remedy. The Apex Court opined as under: "15. It could thus be seen that, this Court has clearly held 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. It has been held that this rule a....