2021 (7) TMI 1050 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Maintainability of petition - remedy of appeal was not exhausted - petition entertained only on the ground of delay, valid or not - Validity of assessment order - challenge on the ground that the assessment orders are passed against the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 1956 and in violation of decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in various judgments - HELD THAT - The power of judicial review of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to scrutinize the processes through which a decision is taken by the competent authority by following the procedures as contemplated, but not the decision itself. Therefore, the routine entertainment of a Writ Petition by dispensing with appellate remedy is not preferable and such an exercise would cause injury to the institutional hierarchy and the importance attached to such appellate institutions. The appellate institutions provided under the statute at no circumstances be undermined by the higher Courts. The appellate forums are the final fact finding authorities and more so, possessing expertise in a particular field. The finding of such appellate forums would be a valuable assistance for the purpose of exercise of judicial review by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The High Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry with reference to the facts and circumstances based on the documents and evidences. Based on the mere affidavits filed by the litigants, the disputed facts cannot be concluded. Thus, the importance of fact finding by the appellate forums is of more value for the purpose of providing complete justice to the parties approaching the Court of law. The point of delay may be an acceptable ground for the purpose of entertaining a Writ Petition. The practise of filing the Writ Petition without exhausting the statutory remedies are in ascending mode and such Writ Petitions are filed with a view to avoid pre-deposits to be made in statutory appeals and on the ground that the appellate remedies are time consuming. The petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal, before the jurisdictional appellate authority, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in the prescribed format and complying with the provisions of the Acts and rules and in the event of receiving any such appeal from the petitioner, the appellate authority shall consider the same, on merits - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenging assessment orders under Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 1956 without exhausting statutory appeal remedy.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged assessment orders passed by the 1st respondent, citing violations of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 1956 and decisions of the Division Bench of the Court. However, the Court emphasized that the petitioner had not exhausted the statutory appeal remedy available under the Act. The Court highlighted the importance of adjudication before the appellate authority in cases involving disputed facts, as the appellate authority serves as the final fact-finding body. It stated that the High Court cannot review original proceedings as the appellate authority is better equipped to scrutinize documents and evidence to make informed decisions.

The Court reiterated that exhausting the appellate remedy is a rule to be followed, as it ensures redressal of grievances in accordance with the law. While acknowledging that writ proceedings can be entertained before exhausting the appellate remedy, the Court emphasized that such exceptions should only be made in cases of imminent threat or gross injustice warranting urgent relief. Mere violation of natural justice principles is deemed insufficient to bypass the appellate process. The Court stressed that the statutory appellate authorities are crucial as final fact-finding bodies, and their findings are essential for the High Court's judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Furthermore, the Court underscored that the power of judicial review under Article 226 is to scrutinize the decision-making processes, not the decisions themselves. It cautioned against routinely entertaining writ petitions without exhausting the appellate remedy, as it could undermine the appellate institutions and their expertise in specific fields. The Court emphasized the value of fact-finding by appellate forums in providing complete justice to litigants and discouraging the practice of filing writ petitions to avoid statutory pre-deposits and lengthy appellate processes.

In conclusion, the Court directed the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the jurisdictional appellate authority within four weeks, following prescribed formats and rules. The appellate authority was instructed to consider the appeal on merits and in accordance with the law, providing the petitioner with an opportunity and aiming to issue final orders expeditiously, preferably within three months. The Court disposed of the Writ Petitions with this direction, without imposing any costs, and closed the connected Miscellaneous Petitions.