9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder the Act for preferring a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority. In the light of the above decision wherein it is held that there is no absolute bar for entertaining a writ petition, the decision of the learned Single Judge in holding as if there is a blanket ban for entertaining a writ petition cannot be countenanced. Hence, the impugned order is interfered with. Revision of assessment, which was initially completed by issuance of a notice under Section 27 of the VAT Act - HELD THAT:- Our attention is drawn to a certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant dated 16.2.2017 - No doubt, the said certificate dated 16.2.2017 is much after the assessment order dated 15.9.2016. Nevertheless, had an opportunity been granted to the appellant to produce the books of accounts and other records, in all probabilities, the dispute would have been resolved. Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity can be granted to the appellant to go before the Assessing Officer and place all records so as to enable the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment in accordance with law after taking note of the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ower under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, ought not to have entertained the writ petition assailing the order passed by the Statutory Authority, which was not appealed against within the maximum period of limitation before the concerned Appellate Authority. 5. In our respectful view, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said decision has not held that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is an absolute bar. We are of the said view after noting the observations/findings rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the following paragraphs : 11. In the backdrop of these facts, the central question is: whether the High Court ought to have entertained the writ petition filed by the respondent? As regards the power of the High Court to issue directions, orders or writs in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the same is no more res integra. Even though the High Court can entertain a writ petition against any order or direction passed/action taken by the State under Article 226 of the Constitution, it ought not to do so as a matter of course when the aggrieved person could have availed of an effe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ingh Nathmal, held that although the power of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is very wide, the Court must exercise self imposed restraint and not entertain the writ petition. Further, in paragraph 15, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the High Court may accede to such a challenge and can also non suit the petitioner on the ground that alternative efficacious remedy is available and that be invoked by the writ petitioner. In addition, in paragraph 19, the Hon'ble Supreme Court took note of the fact that when the High Court refuses to exercise the jurisdiction under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, it would be necessary for the Court to record that there was no case of violation of the principles of natural justice or non compliance of statutory requirements in any manner. 7. Therefore, there are certain broad parameters, within which, the Court has to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, which read as hereunder : (i) if there is unfairness in the action of the Statutory Authority; (ii) if there is unreasonableness in the action of the Statutory Authority; (iii) if perversity writs large in the action t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary 2013; 3. ITC reversal under Section 19(9) of the TNVAT Act, 2006 on invisible loss @ 10% on ₹ 5,14,595/-; 4. Sale of plant and equipments taxable @ 5%; 5. Deemed sale value of taxable goods declared as exempted purchases in the monthly returns; 6. TDS not deducted on the addition of buildings @ 2% under Section 13; 7. TDS not deducted on the dyeing contract charges @ 5% under Section 13; 8. Dyeing charges received in the course of inter-state trade not covered by 'C' declaration warrants reversal of ITC under Section 19(5)(c); and 9. No recorded evidence produced for sales return of ₹ 80,827/- taxable @ 5%. 8. The appellant submitted their reply as well as additional reply both dated 09.11.2015. Thereafter, it appears that the Assessing Officer did not call for the book of accounts of the appellant, but proceeded to complete the assessment. In so far as defect Nos.1, 2, 3, 6 and 9 are concerned, the proposal made in revision notice was dropped by the Assessing Officer on being satisfied with the explanation offered by the appellant. This would prima facie show that there had been application of mind by the Assessing Officer. 9. So far as defect Nos.4, 5 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
