2021 (8) TMI 478 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Maintainability of petition - appellate remedy not exhausted - invocation of Section 23 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 - HELD THAT - This Court is of the considered opinion that even at the first instance, the petitioner is expected to exhaust the appellate remedy contemplated under the provisions of the TNVAT Act and no writ petition needs to be entertained before exhausting the appellate remedy. Even otherwise also, the petitioner is bound to prefer an appeal on merits and adjudicate the merits with reference to the documents and evidenced made available, as the appellate authority is the final fact finding authority. This being the factum, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal before the jurisdictional appellate authority under the provisions of the TNVAT Act and in the event of filing any such appeal in a prescribed format by complying with the provisions of the TNVAT Act, the appellate authority shall entertain the same by condoning the delay, if any, adjudicate the appeal on merits and in accordance with law by affording opportunity to the writ petitioner and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to orders passed by Commercial Tax Officer, applicability of previous court judgments, preference of appellate remedy before High Court intervention.

Analysis:

The judgment concerns writ petitions challenging orders passed by the respondent Commercial Tax Officer. The petitioner argued that the facts and circumstances are similar to a previous case decided by the court. However, the Government Advocate contended that the State had filed appeals against the previous order. The court emphasized that following previous orders in a routine manner could lead to unnecessary litigation and hardship for litigants. It was stated that the petitioner should first exhaust the appellate remedy under the TNVAT Act before seeking relief through a writ petition.

The court highlighted that the appellate authority is the final fact-finding body and the petitioner must appeal on merits with reference to available documents. Since the State had also appealed the order relied upon by the petitioner, the court directed the petitioner to pursue an appeal before the jurisdictional appellate authority under the TNVAT Act. The appellate authority was instructed to entertain the appeal, condone any delays, adjudicate on merits, and dispose of the appeal promptly.

In conclusion, the writ petitions were disposed of with the direction for the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy before the jurisdictional authority under the TNVAT Act. No costs were awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.