Disposed

M/S. Mohan Travels v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Mar 2014WP/4290/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging assessment orders on the ground of an efficiently available alternative remedy. However, it granted liberty to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 2(1)(i) of the Maharashtra Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Area Act, 1987, if necessary post-appeal, and continued interim relief.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is disposed of on the ground that the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy available. Liberty is granted to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 2(1)(i) of the

M/S. Mohan Travels Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

wp-4290-2009

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.4290 OF 2009

¶4

M/s. Mohan Travels .. Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Others .. Respondents.

¶5

Mr. C. B. Thakkar i/b. Mr. M. M. Vaidya, for the Petitioner. Mr. M. M. Malvankar, 'A' Panel Counsel for the Respondents.

¶6

CORAM: MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & M.S.SANKLECHA,J. DATE : 12 MARCH 2014.

¶7

P.C:

¶8

After the matter was heard for sometime, it was brought to our notice that the petitioner has already challenged the Assessment Orders for the Assessment Years 200203, 200304 and 200405 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax (Investigation), Kolhapur under the Maharashtra Tax on Entry of Motor Vehicles into Local Area Act, 1987 (herein after referred to as the Act) before the Appellate Authority.

¶9

2 In view of the efficacious alternate remedy already availed of by the petitioner, we do not entertain this petition in so far as the petitioner has challenged the impugned Assessment Orders for the above mentioned Assessment Years.

¶10

3 As regards petitioner's challenge to the constitutional validity of the provisions of Section 2(1)(i) of the Act, we are of the view that the petitioner would be required to press the said challenge only in case the

1 of 2

S.R.JOSHI

wp-4290-2009

interpretation sought to be pressed by the petitioner on the regular statutory provisions is not accepted by the Appellate Authority.

¶15

4 In view of the above, while disposing of the Writ Petition in so far as it challenges the impugned Assessment Orders under the Act, liberty is granted to the petitioner to challenge the constitutional validity of the provisions of Section 2(1)(i) of the Act, in case that becomes necessary for the petitioner to do so after the decision of the Appellate Authorities.

¶16

5 Subject to the above liberty, Writ Petition is disposed of on the ground that the petitioner has alternate efficacious remedy available and the petitioner has already availed of it.

¶17

6 At this stage, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned relief granted in terms of prayer clause (g), subject to petitioner's furnishing bank guarantee of Rs.4 lakhs may be continued till the Appellate Authorities decide the appeal and for a period of four weeks thereafter in case the decision of the Appellate Authorities is adverse to the petitioner. Since the interim relief was granted on 17 July 2009 and the Petition is being disposed of without going into the merits of the controversy, we continue the interim relief granted earlier on 17 July 2009, subject to the petitioner keeping the bank guarantee of Rs.4 lakhs in force till the disposal of the appeal for a period of six weeks thereafter.

¶18

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶19

(M.S.SANKLECHA,J.)

¶20

2 of 2

¶21

S.R.JOSHI

M/S. Mohan Travels v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Mohan Travels v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Director of Income Tax (E) Vs Jamsetji Tata Trust

Louis Anthony Dias and 4 Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and 9 Others

Commissioner of Income Tax(Central-Iv), Mumbai Vs Income Tax Settlement Commission(Itsc) Additional Bench and 42 Ors.

Hanmant v. Gunale and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Hanmant v. Gunale and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

M/S. Mohan Travels Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.