9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nary jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India in the absence of existence of any factor set out in the above decision for entertaining a writ petition against an order of the adjudicating authority. The petitions are accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and decided on merits. 4.1 In support of his submissions, the learned advocate for the petitioners placed reliance upon an unreported decision of this court in the case of India Logistics and Cargo Movers v. The State of Gujarat rendered on 24th September, 2019 in Special Civil Application No.15178 of 2019, wherein the court, in the facts of the said case found that the impugned order was totally bereft of any reasons and held that in the absence of any reasons being assigned for confiscation of the goods and the conveyance in question, the impugned order stands vitiated due to non-application of mind on the part of the maker of the order. It was submitted that in the facts of the present cases also, the adjudicating authority has not as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd has stated that they have nothing more to add. Thus, when the petitioners were served with the show cause notice and were provided an opportunity of hearing, it cannot be said that the impugned order suffers from breach of the principles of natural justice. 7. As regards the contention that the impugned order is a non-speaking order, having regard to the contents of the impugned order in original, it is not possible to state that the same is a non-speaking order. The decision of this court in the case of India Logistics and Cargo Movers v. The State of Gujarat (supra), therefore, does not in any manner support the case of petitioners. 8. The Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Chhabil Dass Agarwal, (2014) 1 SCC 603, has held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner of Income Tax (Appeals)." 9. In the light of the above settled legal position, having regard to the fact that the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy by way of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), this court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India in the absence of existence of any factor set out in the above decision for entertaining a writ petition against an order of the adjudicating authority. 10. It is, however, clarified that this court has not examined the impugned order on merits and in case the petitioners challenge the impugned order-in-original before the appellate authority, the appellate authority shall consider the same on merits wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
