9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (5) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 148 based on the belief that certain income has escaped assessment - In view of the above position, there is no justification for this court to interfere with the impugned orders in exercise of its power under article 226 of the Constitution of India - Accordingly, the original petition is dismissed in limine without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to invoke the statutory remedy available to it. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tified the approach of the petitioner directly to this court relying on the decisions of the apex court/this court in State of Kerala v. K. T. Shaduli Yusuff [1977] 39 STC 478 (SC) ; G K N Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC) ; Dunlop India Ltd. v. CST (Asst.) [1989] 175 ITR 622 (Ker) ; T. C. N. Menon v. ITO [1974] 96 ITR 148 (Ker) ; Capricorn Shopping Complex v. ITO [1996] 218 ITR 721 (Ker) ; P. S. Abdul Majeed v. Agrl. ITO and STO [1994] 209 ITR 821 (Ker) ; Tin Box Co. v. CIT [2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC) ; CTO v. Sardul Textiles Mills [1988] 71 STC 223 (Raj) ; J. T. (India) Exports v. Union of India [2003] 262 ITR 269 (Delhi) [FB] and M. S. Jewellery v. Asst. Commr. (Assessment), Agrl. IT and ST [1994] 208 ITR 531 (Ker) ; [19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not have any power to remand the case to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, it is submitted that when an assessment is made in violation of the principles of natural justice as was done in the case on hand, the petitioner is left without any remedy. I heard learned senior counsel Shri P. K. R. Menon for the Revenue. Learned senior counsel would submit that a hierarchy of authorities is provided under the Act giving efficacious alternative remedy to the petitioner. Therefore, it is submitted that there is no justification for directly knocking at the doors of this court. It is also submitted that the provision empowering remand has been deleted to avoid unnecessary delay in finalising the cases. The appellate authority has got all the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 226 of the Constitution of India, instead of directly knocking at the doors of the apex court at the first instance. In the said decision, it was held : "Reasons, good and substantial, exist for directing the petitioner to approach the concerned High Court in the first instance instead of knocking at the doors of this court straightaway. And these need to be spelled out. 2. An illustration may tell more effectively, what otherwise may not be told as effectively, and perhaps, only with some embarrassment. Suppose there is only one National Hospital established especially for performing open-heart surgery which cannot be performed elsewhere in any of the eighteen Regional Hospitals. What will happen to the patients needing such surgery, if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... everything which even the High Court can do, this court will not be able to do what this court alone can do under article 136 of the Constitution of India, and other provisions conferring exclusive jurisdiction on this court. There is no reason to assume that the concerned High Court will not do justice. Or that this court alone can do justice. If this court entertains writ petitions at the instance of parties who approach this court directly instead of approaching the concerned High Court in the first instance, tens of thousands of writ petitions would in course of time be instituted in this court directly. The inevitable result will be that the arrears pertaining to matters in respect of which this court exercises exclusive jurisdiction u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... directed to adopt this course and approach the High Court" The above reasoning of the apex court will squarely apply to the cases where the petitioners directly come to this court without invoking the effective statutory remedies available to them. Now, after Anisminic Ltd. v. Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 1 All ER 208 (HL), every error of law is a jurisdictional error. Further, the omission to take into account a relevant fact or taking into account an irrelevant fact, will take the decision of the inferior authority outside its jurisdiction. If during the course of the proceedings, the authority departs from the rules of natural justice, the resultant decision will be one suffering from jurisdictional error. Having regard to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
