9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner to alternate remedy and hold that it would be appropriate to hold that the writ petitioner can assail the impugned order by way of a statutory appeal before the said Appellate Authority. This Court is informed without disputation or disagreement that statutory appeal is under Section 51 of TNVAT Act. A perusal of Section 51 of TNVAT Act reveals that there is a pre-deposit / pre-condition requirement and that is 25% of the tax liability. From the trajectory of the instant matter, it comes out clearly that writ petitioner has already made the pre-deposit while preferring the first round of statutory appeal before the said Appellate Authority. More importantly, this Court is informed without any disputation or disagreement that besi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt. 2.With consent of learned counsel on both sides, main writ petition is taken up, heard out and is being disposed of. 3. Subject matter of instant writ petition arises under 'Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (Tamil Nadu Act 32 of 2006)', hereinafter ' TNVAT Act' for brevity. 4.Writ petitioner is a dealer under TNVAT Act. Writ petitioner was filing monthly returns under Section 21 of TNVAT Act and there was deemed assessment under Section 22(2) of TNVAT Act. 5.When things stood as above, a revised Assessment Order came to be passed by the respondent on 04.11.2015. Writ petitioner carried this revised Assessment Order in appeal by way of a statutory app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion, submissions before this Court was focused on one pivotal point and that one pivotal point is that in the impugned order, the respondent has not made the revised assessment in accordance with and in tune with the directions given by said Appellate Authority vide the aforesaid order dated 16.06.2017. A perusal of directions given by said Appellate Authority and the impugned order reveals that this plea turns largely on facts. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that it would be appropriate to relegate the writ petitioner to alternate remedy and hold that it would be appropriate to hold that the writ petitioner can assail the impugned order by way of a statutory appeal before the said Appellate Authority. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th this case, this Court deems it appropriate to mention about the obtaining position with regard to alternate remedy. Alternate remedy rule qua exercise of writ jurisdiction on the teeth of alternate remedy is no doubt a selfimposed restraint and therefore it is not an absolute rule. In other words, alternate remedy rule, is a rule of discretion and it is not a rule of compulsion. This Court reminds itself of Dunlop India case [ Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal vs. Dunlop India Ltd. and ors. ] reported in (1985) 1 SCC 260 and the relevant paragraph is Paragraph 4 and the same reads as follows: '4. Article 226 is not meant to short circuit or circumvent statutory procedures. It is onl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Satyawati Tondon the High Court had restrained further proceedings under Section 13(4) of the Act. Upon a detailed consideration of the statutory scheme under the SARFAESI Act, the availability of remedy to the aggrieved under Section 17 before the Tribunal and the appellate remedy under Section 18 before the Appellate Tribunal, the object and purpose of the legislation, it was observed that a writ petition ought not to be entertained in view of the alternate statutory remedy available holding: (SCC pp.123 128, Paras 43 55) 43. Unfortunately, the High Court overlooked the settled law that the High Court will ordinarily not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective remedy is availab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and highlight) 13. In the light of the narrative thus far, this Court passes the following order is passed: a) Impugned order dated 29.03.2019 bearing reference TIN No.33144244104/2009-2010 is not interfered with, leaving it open to the writ petitioner to assail the same by way of a statutory appeal under Section 51 of TNVAT before Appellate Authority; b) If the writ petitioner files a statutory appeal before aforesaid Appellate Authority, as writ petitioner has already made pre-deposit of 25% in the previous round of statutory appeal, writ petitioner shall not be called upon to make 25% pre-deposit again and Appellate Authority shall entertain the appeal without insisting on this pre-depo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
