Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (6) TMI 313

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Rs. 15 lakhs as early as in 2017 itself. Taking note of the fact that the appellant had preferred the appeal as envisaged in Sec. 129 A (1) of the Act and had already remitted the mandatory pre-deposit, the Tribunal ought to have granted the appellant a reasonable opportunity to take appropriate steps for getting the Writ Petition, which was then pending before this Court, disposed of and then to permit him to pursue his remedy in the pending appeal before the Tribunal. Non-suiting him in limine does not appear to be reasonable, especially in the facts and circumstances of the case. The Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the matter ought to have afforded the appellant an opportunity to challenge the penalty of Rs. 2 crores imposed u .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... remit the pre-deposit of Rs. 15 lakhs, albeit with delay and filed an appeal before the Tribunal at Bangalore. Appellant would contend that after thus filing the Writ Petition and the appeal, he was kept in oblivion regarding further developments in the said litigation. Later in the year 2021, he was visited with recovery proceedings initiated by the authorities to realise the penalty of Rs. 2 Crores and upon frenetic inquiry, he was informed that both the appeal as well as the Writ Petition had been dismissed as early as in the year 2017. The appeal had been disposed of by the Tribunal vide Ext. P3 Order dated 03.10.2017 holding that as the appellant had already approached the High Court invoking Article 226 of the Constitution on the sam .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the learned Single Judge and had assailed it on multiple grounds. The Writ Petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge noting that though Ext. P3 order dismissing the appeal was rendered as early as on 03.10.2017, the appellant had approached this Court more than six years from the date of the said Order. That the application for restoring the appeal was filed after five years from the date of dismissal of the appeal had also weighed with the learned Single Judge. Holding that the reasoning of the Tribunal for dismissing the restoration application was valid and justified, the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Single Judge erred in dismissing the Wri .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uttresses her prayer in the Writ Petition for a direction to restore the appeal before the Tribunal and for its consideration on merits. This according to her, was lost sight of by the learned Single Judge. 7. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the submissions made on behalf of the appellant. The learned Standing Counsel submits that the facts and circumstances as revealed by the records produced by the appellant himself would reveal serious laches and negligence from his part in pursuing the appeal before the Tribunal as also in contesting the Writ Petition filed at the first instance before this Court. The learned Standing Counsel also submits that the Writ Petition, the judgment in which the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... issing the appeal in limine, overlooked the trite principle that Courts and Tribunals should endeavour to decide a litigation on merits rather than on default. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sheo Raj Singh ors. v. Union of India Anr. (2023 SCC Online SC 1278) has affirming this preposition and following its earlier dictum in State of Nagaland v. Lipok Ao ors. [(2005) 3 SCC 752] held that courts should attempt to decide a case on its merits, unless the same is hopelessly without merit. In Robin Thapa v. Rohit Dora (2019 SCC online SC 836), it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that litigation is based on adjudication on the merits of the contentions of the parties. Litigation should not be terminated by default, either of the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates