TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 590
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etitioners; Mr.Koushik Kanduri and Mr.B.Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Mr.N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for respondent No.1 in WP.No.3349 of 2026, Mr.R.Shyam Sundar, learned counsel representing on behalf of Mr.N.Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for respondent No.1 in WP.No.3352 of 2026 and Mr.Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 in both writ petitions and perused the record. 2. The challenge in the present Writ Petitions is to the order dated 30.09.2025 (Annexure P.2) passed by the 4th respondent, wherein, apart from confiscating the gold chains which were carried by the petitioners herein worth R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rpn.Ltd., [(2003) 2 SCC 107] Commissioner of Income Tax v. Chhabil Dass Agarwal [(2014)1SCC 603] and recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magadh Sugar & Energy Ltd., v. the State of Bihar [(2022)16SCC428] All of which primarily hold that the existence of an alternative remedy does not by itself bar the High Court from exercising its jurisdiction in certain contingencies. 7. Dealing with the aspect of maintainability of writ petitions at this juncture, it would be relevant to take note of the dates relevant for the adjudication of said objection. The impugned order in these cases is dated 30.09.2025. Under Section 128, the appeal ought to have been preferred by the petitioners before the Commissioner (Appeals) by 30....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of India. Wherein the writ jurisdiction should generally not be invoked when an efficacious alternative remedy exists, especially in matters involving factual disputes or where an appellate forum is specifically designated under the statute. Some of these principles that have been laid is that which is reflected in the case of Radha Krishan Industries v. State of Himachal Pradesh [(2021) 6 SCC 771] Where it has been referred to the catena of judgments and articulated these principles in paragraph 27 &28wherein held as under: "27. The principles of law which emerge are that: 27.1. The power under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue writs can be exercised not only for the enforcement of fundamental rights, but for any ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ercise of its writ jurisdiction, such a view would not readily be interfered with. 28. These principles have been consistently upheld by this Court in Chand Ratan v. Durga Prasad [Chand Ratan v. Durga Prasad, (2003) 5 SCC 399], Babubhai Muljibhai Patel v. Nandlal Khodidas Barot [Babubhai Muljibhai Patel v. Nandlal Khodidas Barot, (1974) 2 SCC 706] and Rajasthan SEB v. Union of India [Rajasthan SEB v. Union of India, (2008) 5 SCC 632] among other decisions." 11. The aforesaid principles were further reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5125 of 2021 in the case of Assistant Commissioner of State Tax v. M/s.Commercial Steel Limited. The principles enunciated in the preceding paragraph would clearly indicate th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2 of the Constitution, it is unfathomable as to how the High Court can take a different approach in the matter in reference to Article 226 of the Constitution. The principle underlying the rejection of such argument by this Court would apply on all fours to the exercise of power by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. 19. We may now revert to the Full Bench decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Electronics Corpn. of India Ltd. [Electronics Corpn. of India Ltd. v. Union of India, 2018 SCC OnLine Hyd 21 : (2018) 361 ELT 22], which had adopted the view taken by the Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Panoli Intermediate (India) (P) Ltd. v. Union of India [Panoli Intermediate (India) (P) Ltd. v. Union of Ind....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter of course. Doing so would be in the teeth of the principle underlying the dictum of a three-Judge Bench of this Court in ONGC [ONGC v. Gujarat Energy Transmission Corpn. Ltd., (2017) 5 SCC 42 : (2017) 3 SCC (Civ) 47] In other words, the fact that the High Court has wide powers, does not mean that it would issue a writ which may be inconsistent with the legislative intent regarding the dispensation explicitly prescribed under Section 31 of the 2005 Act. That would render the legislative scheme and intention behind the stated provision otiose." 12. If we look into the facts of the present case, we have no hesitation to reach to the conclusion that the facts of the present case squarely fits into the observations made by the Hon'ble Sup....