2016 (7) TMI 1562 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - grant of exemption to the petitioner for payment of tax by the notification issued to department - HELD THAT - It is well settled principle of law that availability of alternative remedy is not a bar in exercise of writ jurisdiction for issuance of writ of certiorary, however, if there is factual dispute then certainly the court can refuse to entertain the writ petition. There is a factual dispute involved for determination to the effect that whether the petitioner is eligible to get exemption from payment of tax and that can very well be decided by the appellate authority. It would not be just and proper to decide the controversy at this stage because some factual aspects have to be considered by the authority - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to assessment order, availability of alternative remedy, eligibility for exemption from tax.

Analysis:
1. Challenge to Assessment Order: The petitioner challenged the assessment order dated 23/02/2015 and the rejection order dated 02/05/2015 regarding the correction of error. The dispute pertained to the assessment year 14-09 to 11/08/2012.

2. Availability of Alternative Remedy: The respondents argued that the petition was not maintainable as the petitioner had an alternative remedy of appeal. The petitioner contended that the authority did not consider the exemption granted for tax payment, making it justifiable for the court to hear the petition despite the availability of an alternative remedy.

3. Eligibility for Exemption from Tax: The petitioner claimed that exemption was granted by a notification, which the authority did not consider. The authority found that the Mandideep unit was eligible for exemption as per the terms of the notification, but the Betul unit was not eligible. The court noted a factual dispute regarding the eligibility for tax exemption, which should be determined by the appellate authority.

4. The court highlighted that the availability of an alternative remedy does not bar the exercise of writ jurisdiction unless there is a factual dispute. In this case, since there was a factual dispute regarding the eligibility for tax exemption, the court deemed it appropriate for the appellate authority to decide the matter.

5. The court disposed of the petition with directions for the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal within 45 days. The appellate authority was instructed to consider the appeal on merits, disregarding the question of limitation. The petitioner was also given the liberty to seek a stay before the appellate authority.

6. In conclusion, the court emphasized that the controversy regarding tax exemption eligibility should be decided by the appellate authority due to the factual aspects involved. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.