TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1575
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order dated 12.07.2022 (Annexure P/6) for the period 01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017 under Section 20 (5) of the M.P. Vat Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act of 2002'). 2. Petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 2013. The petitioner company is also registered under the provisions of Act of 2002 under respondent No.1 and the provisions of Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The respondent No. 3 issued impugned notice dated 17.02.2021 for assessment under Section 20 (5) of the Act of 2002 on the ground that the petitioner did not furnish Return/Audit report as required under Section 39 (2) in time for the period 01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017. 3. According to the petitioner, the said notice was communicated only on 17....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....atter when a statutory remedy of appeal is available, the High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Assessment Order by-passing the statutory remedy of appeal. Shri Soni, learned counsel further submits that especially in case of the M.P. Vat Act, 2002, the Apex Court has set aside the order of the writ Court and relegated the petitioner to the appellate authority. Paragraph 6 and 8 of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced hereunder : "6. At this stage, a recent decision of this Court in the case of The State of Maharashtra and Others v. Greatship (India) Limited (Civil Appeal No. 4956 of 2022, decided on 20.09.2022) is required to be referred to. After taki....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notice of the fact that the vast majority of the petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution are filed solely for the purpose of obtaining interim orders and thereafter prolong the proceedings by one device or the other. The practice certainly needs to be strongly discouraged." 50. In Punjab National Bank v. O.C. Krishnan (2001) 6 SCC 569 this Court considered the question whether a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution was maintainable against an order passed by the Tribunal under Section 19 of the DRT Act and observed: (SCC p. 570, paras 5-6) "5. In our opinion, the order which was passed by the Tribunal directing sale of mortgaged property was appealable under Section 20 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Bank....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Division Bench of the Orissa High Court quashing the showcause notice issued to the respondent under the Orissa Sales Tax Act by observing that the High Court had completely ignored the parameters laid down by this Court in a large number of cases relating to exhaustion of alternative remedy. 52. In City and Industrial Development Corpn. v. Dosu Aardeshir Bhiwandiwala [(2009) 1 SCC 168] the Court highlighted the parameters which are required to be kept in view by the High Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Paras 29 and 30 of that judgment which contain the views of this Court read as under: (SCC pp. 175-76) "29. In our opinion, the High Court while exercising its extraordinary juri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....irect the State or its instrumentalities as the case may be to file proper affidavits placing all the relevant facts truly and accurately for the consideration of the Court and particularly in cases where public revenue and public interest are involved. Such directions are always required to be complied with by the State. No relief could be granted in a public law remedy as a matter of course only on the ground that the State did not file its counter-affidavit opposing the writ petition. Further, empty and self-defeating affidavits or statements of Government spokesmen by themselves do not form basis to grant any relief to a person in a public law remedy to which he is not otherwise entitled to in law." 53. In Raj Kumar Shivhare v.....