2023 (8) TMI 856 - HC - Service Tax

Issuance of discharge certificates - seeking direction to respondents to not initiate any coercive action seeking recovery of alleged interest dues against the petitioner during the pendency of the present petition - adherence to the provisions of SVS, 2019 - gross suppression of documents by the petitioner - HELD THAT - The petitioner is required to be non-suited on the ground of suppression of facts and documents, irrespective of whatever reliefs the petitioner has prayed in the present petition. The law in this regard is well settled. A litigant cannot be expected to approach the Court by suppressing materials and more particularly such material which is prejudicial to the petitioner. There are no manner of doubt that the petition cannot be entertained and it would be required to be dismissed - petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
The issues involved in this case include the petitioner's request for a Writ of Certiorari/Mandamus, non-payment of service tax liability, suppression of documents by the petitioner, and the consequences of invoking the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Writ of Certiorari/Mandamus:
The petitioner sought various reliefs through the writ petition, including the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari/Mandamus to challenge the validity and legality of certain provisions and to set aside an order dated 08.06.2022. Additionally, the petitioner requested the court to direct the respondents to not initiate coercive action for recovery of interest dues and to adhere to the provisions of SVS, 2019. However, the court noted that the petitioner had suppressed crucial documents related to the case, which were essential for adjudication. The respondents highlighted the petitioner's repeated defaults in making payments despite assurances given, leading to the dismissal of the petition due to the petitioner approaching the court with unclean hands.

Suppression of Documents:
The respondents pointed out that the petitioner had suppressed crucial documents regarding non-payment of service tax liability and correspondence with the revenue authorities. Despite assurances to pay the outstanding amounts, the petitioner continued to default in making payments, which was evident from the timeline of communications between the parties. The court emphasized that the petitioner's failure to disclose these documents amounted to approaching the court with unclean hands, leading to the dismissal of the petition.

Consequences of Invoking Writ Jurisdiction:
The court observed that the petitioner, by suppressing material facts and documents, had failed to approach the court with clean hands. The petitioner's conduct of withholding crucial information prejudiced the case and rendered them undeserving of the reliefs sought through the writ petition. It was established that the petitioner's actions violated the principle that litigants must present all relevant information to the court transparently. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, emphasizing that a litigant cannot expect favorable outcomes by concealing detrimental facts and documents essential for the case's adjudication.