2015 (12) TMI 1899 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Revision of assessment - maintainability of petition - Availability of statutory remedy of filing an appeal as against the order of assessment - invocation of jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution - HELD THAT - It is not the case of the petitioner herein that he was not put on notice or that the authority, who passed the order of assessment, is not having the jurisdiction. On the other hand, the competent authority has passed the order of assessment, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and by considering the objection raised by them. Needless to say that if the consideration of objection was not proper or erroneous, that cannot be a ground to maintain the writ petition, since the alleged erroneous consideration or improper consideration cannot be stated as violation of principles of natural justice. On the other hand, it may be a good ground for filing an appeal. Therefore, when the present assessment order having been passed by the competent authority, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the same cannot be questioned under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as the petitioner has to raise all those grounds only before the appellate authority who is also a fact finding authority. All these writ petitions are dismissed, however, with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order impugned in these writ petitions before the appellate authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner aggrieved against revision of assessment; Availability of statutory remedy of filing an appeal; Entertaining writ petitions on the ground of retrospective application of amendment; Maintainability of writ petitions challenging assessment order; Need to exhaust alternative remedy of filing an appeal; Dismissal of writ petitions with liberty to challenge order before appellate authority.

Analysis:
The judgment addresses multiple issues arising from writ petitions challenging the revision of assessment. The court emphasizes the importance of exhausting all statutory remedies before approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in fiscal matters. It is established that the petitioner, when issued notice and offered a personal hearing before the assessment order, must first appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner before seeking relief from the High Court. The appellate authority is deemed a fact-finding body capable of considering objections raised by the petitioner and deciding on all aspects during the appeal process.

The counsel for the petitioner argued that the writ petitions could be entertained based on the ground that the amendment mentioned in the assessment cannot be applied retrospectively. However, the court rejects this contention, stating that the same ground can be raised before the appellate authority for consideration. The court clarifies that the prayer in the writ petitions challenges the assessment order, not the amendment itself. Therefore, the writ petitions are deemed not maintainable solely because the petitioner must exhaust the alternative remedy of filing an appeal as provided by the statute.

The judgment cites previous decisions to support the principle that resorting to filing writ petitions before the High Court without exhausting the statutory remedy of appeal is impermissible in fiscal matters. The court reiterates that the appellate authority is the appropriate forum to address objections and alleged errors in the assessment order. As such, the court dismisses all writ petitions but grants the petitioner the liberty to challenge the impugned order before the appellate authority within a specified timeframe. No costs are imposed, and connected miscellaneous petitions are closed as a result of the judgment.