Dismissed

M/S. Swaraj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Dept. of Finance and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Dec 2023IA/17740/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging an assessment order, noting the petitioner failed to explain a three-year delay and that an adequate statutory appeal remedy was available. The court directed the petitioner to file the appeal within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file statutory appeal within four weeks; Writ Petition and Interim Application dismissed.

M/S. Swaraj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Anr… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

Sayyed

¶2

909-WP-15252-2023.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.15252 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.17740 OF 2023

¶5

M/s. Swaraj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Petitioners/Applicants

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra

¶8

Through Ministry of Finance And Ors.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

********

¶11

Mr. Nikhil Wadikar a/w Mr. Niranjan Kandade i/by Vikas Daware Ideal Law Firm for the Petitioners/Applicants.

¶12

Ms. Shruti D. Vyas, Addl. GP a/w Ms. P. N. Diwan, AGP for the Respondent/State.

¶13

¶14

CORAM : G. S. KULKARNI, JITENDRA JAIN, J.J.

¶15

Date : 6th DECEMBER, 2023.

¶16

P.C.

¶17

We are prima facie satisfied that the petitioner has failed to make out any ground, much less any ground anywhere in the memo of petition, in regard to the contention as urged before us that the impugned assessment order passed under Section 23 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002 is required to be held illegal in the proceedings of this Writ Petition.

¶18

1 of 3

¶19

Sayyed

¶20

909-WP-15252-2023.doc

¶21

Needless to observe that to consider any issue of limitation and more particularly when in the present case, there is an issue on remand, as specifically set out in the body of the assessment orders, it was incumbent for the petitioner to set out a clear case in the memo of the petition urging as to how the impugned order would be beyond the prescribed period of limitation as provided under Section 23 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002.

¶22

Be that as it may, it is also clear to us that this is a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the assessment order, for which the appropriate remedy for the petitioner is to file a statutory appeal as provided under Section 26 of the MVAT Act.

¶23

We find that the impugned assessment order is dated 25th April 2019. The present petition was filed on 26th April 2022. On perusal of the averments as made in the petition, we see that there is no explanation whatsoever in regard to such a delay of 3 years in approaching this Court by the present proceedings.

¶24

Accordingly, we cannot entertain this petition as an alternate statutory remedy is available to the petitioner to assail the assessment order, on all grounds as may be available to the petitioner.

¶25

2 of 3

¶26

Sayyed

¶27

909-WP-15252-2023.doc

¶28

All contentions on any proposed proceedings are kept expressly open.

¶29

As the petitioner was pursuing the present proceedings bonafide, if an appeal is filed by the petitioner within a period of 4 weeks from today, the same be decided on its merits and without an objection as to the limitation.

¶30

Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶31

In view of disposal of the writ petition, Interim Application No.17740 of 2023 does not survive and the same is also disposed of.

¶32

[JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [G. S. KULKARNI, J.]

¶33

3 of 3

M/S. Swaraj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Dept. of Finance and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Swaraj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Dept. of Finance 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

Peter Jesunathadas Vs Securities and Exchange Board of India and Anr.

Shri. Bipin Badani Vs Union of India , through the Secretary and Anr.

Dadaso Balaso Awad and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Conservation Action Trust, Ghatkopar and Anr. Vs Union of India Thru Ministry of Environment , Forests and Climate Change, Govt. of India and Ors.

Xyz (Informer in the Case of M/S. Palande Courier Pvt. Vs Union of India Thr. Revenue Secrtary Ministry of Finance and Ors.

Swaraj Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Ministry of Finance and Ors.