9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or its officers who were incharge of the day to day affairs of the petitioner, whether were coerced into such act. This is certainly a question of fact. It appears that not only the petitioner decided to voluntarily deposit an amount of Rs. 2,50,00,000/-, but also, agreed that the balance tax payment scheduled would be made within 10 days. It also appears that the search and seizure operations revealed that an amount of more than Rs. 5 crores was due and payable towards the outstanding tax which was very well realized by the petitioner. Thus, the case of the petitioner in the present facts, in regard to any coercion or allegation of any criminal act against the respondent cannot be accepted, not only on account of the petitioner s letter da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances, the petitioner by approaching this Court, for the first time, has made a grievance of a coercive recovery, which in our opinion, cannot be accepted. We may also observe that when an assessee comes before the Court invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and that too making a serious grievance that the department had coerced the assessee to deposit the tax amounts, certainly as to whether it is genuinely a coercion or whether it was a voluntary deposit, as seen in the present case, is purely a disputed question of fact. Such question cannot be gone into and appreciated in the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution. As a result of the discussion, in our opinion, the petition is thoroughly misconc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt was recovered by the respondents from the petitioner by coercion, hence, the petitioner is entitled to refund of the said amount, on the ground that this would amount to collection/retention of the petitioner s amounts without any authority in law. 3. We are quite convinced that in the facts of the present case, such relief cannot be granted to the petitioner for more than one reason, which we discuss hereunder. 4. At the outset, it needs to be noted that the petitioner is a legal person, it is described to be a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. As a legal person, the petitioner certainly cannot be physically coerced. The question is which of the representatives of the petitioner or its officers who were incharge of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng tax which was very well realized by the petitioner. Thus, the case of the petitioner in the present facts, in regard to any coercion or allegation of any criminal act against the respondent cannot be accepted, not only on account of the petitioner s letter dated 13 October 2022, addressed by the petitioner to respondent No. 1, but also on the petitioner s own conduct which does not inspire any confidence for the writ Court to accept such contention. 7. In our opinion, in reality or genuinely if the petitioner was to be coerced, as a prudent legal person would resort, the petitioner could have made complaints and/or representation on such actions of the officers, which in law can certainly be regarded as highhanded and illegal. However, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ircumstances, cannot be categorized as a deposit under coercion. In this regard, there cannot be a straight jacket and/or a blanket opinion which could, at all, be rendered by the Court as any action taken by the department is required to be tested on its own facts. 9. In the present case, it appears that several summonses were issued to the petitioner and that the investigation is in progress, it therefore, appears that the show cause notice, is yet not issued. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner by approaching this Court, for the first time, has made a grievance of a coercive recovery, which in our opinion, cannot be accepted. 10. Mr. Mishra, learned Counsel for the respondents would submit that a show cause notice would be issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsidering such facts the Court exercised its discretion and going deep into the factual matrix and by extensively appreciating the materials on record, including of statements of the concerned persons as recorded during investigation, (as seen from paragraph 20 of the judgment) the Court in the facts of the case, felt it appropriate to grant reliefs. However, in the facts of the present case it is not possible for us to undertake such exercise to appreciate the evidentiary value of any materials which may form part of investigation, much less of any documentary and oral evidence so as to record any finding of facts, more particularly, for the reasons which are set out hereinabove. 13. We may also observe that when an assessee comes before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
