2020 (2) TMI 1326 - SC - VAT and Sales Tax

Maintainability of petition - petition was dismissed merely on the ground that efficacious and alternative remedy is available to the petitioner - HELD THAT - The Division Bench though finally disposed of the appeal, but made no reference to the grievance of the petitioner about the absurd demand made by the Department and has dismissed the Petition merely on the ground that efficacious and alternative remedy is available to the petitioner. We find from the impugned judgment that such contention has not been adverted to nor the Division Bench, while disposing of the matter took note of the earlier direction noted in the conditional order while issuing notice on the Writ Appeal. It is deemed appropriate to grant liberty to the petitioner to approach the High Court by way of Review Petition, if so advised - SLP disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Absurd demand by the Department, failure to consider petitioner's grievance, availability of alternative remedy.

Absurd Demand by the Department:
The petitioner raised a plea in the Writ Petition regarding an absurd demand made by the Department, which was based on an erroneous assumption and lacked hard facts or objective consideration. The Division Bench acknowledged the petitioner's grievance and issued a conditional order directing the petitioner to deposit 10% of the demanded amount. However, the Division Bench, in its final disposal of the appeal, did not address the absurd demand issue and dismissed the Petition on the grounds of the availability of an alternative remedy. The Supreme Court noted that the Division Bench failed to consider the petitioner's contention regarding the absurd demand during the disposal of the matter.

Failure to Consider Petitioner's Grievance:
The Supreme Court observed that the impugned judgment did not address the petitioner's contention about the absurd demand made by the Department. The Division Bench did not take into account the earlier direction given in the conditional order when issuing notice on the Writ Appeal. Due to this failure to consider the petitioner's grievance, the Supreme Court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the High Court through a Review Petition if advised to do so. If the Review Petition is decided against the petitioner, the petitioner has the option to challenge the decision and the impugned judgment by filing a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court.

Availability of Alternative Remedy:
The Supreme Court disposed of the Special Leave Petitions with the liberty granted to the petitioner to pursue further legal recourse. The Court stated that if the Review Petition is unsuccessful, the petitioner can appeal the decision through a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court. The pending applications, if any, were also disposed of in light of the judgment.