High Court held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot adjudicate disputed facts in tax assessment. Petitioner directed to approach appellate authority within four weeks; writ proceeded as dismissal.
Petitioner directed to prefer appeal before Jurisdictional Appellate Authority within four weeks; no order as to costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06-08-2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
WP No.8195 of 2014 And MP No.1 of 2014
Dennis Steels Pvt Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director, Konath Jacob Dennis, Ekku Nagar, Arakkonam, Vellore District. ..Petitioner
vs.
Prayer
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the first respondent in CST 378531/2010-11 dated 14.02.2014 and quash the impugned proceedings dated 14.02.2014.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Kumar For Respondent-1 : Mr.V.Veluchamy, Government Advocate. For Respondent-2 : No Appearance
O R D E R
The assessment order passed by the first respondent in proceedings dated 14.02.2014 for the assessment year 2010-2011, is under challenge in the present writ petition.
2. The petitioner is a registered dealer on the files of the Commercial Tax Officer, Arakkonam Assessment Circle under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. The petitioner is also a registered dealer under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The petitioner is a manufacturer of TMT bars and effected local sales, interstate sales and also effect stock transfer to their branch situate at Mararikulam South, Alappuzha, State of Kerala.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner made a submission that the Assessing Authority has not applied its mind with reference to the returns filed by the petitioner and the objections submitted were also not considered by the Competent Authority. Thus, there is violation of principles of natural justice.
4. However, hearing the arguments as advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is able to form an opinion that legal grounds are raised based on certain disputed facts and those disputed facts cannot be adjudicated in the writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. Adjudication of disputed facts are to be done by the Competent Authority as well by the Appellate Authority based on the original documents and evidences to be made available.
6. Contrarily, the High Court cannot made a finding in respect of such disputed issues, merely on the basis of the affidavit filed by the parties. Thus, the petitioner-Company has to prefer an appeal for the purpose of redressal of their grievances in the manner known to law.
object of legislation providing an appellate remedy cannot be diluted nor the benefit be denied to the aggrieved person to exhaust the same. The statutory appellate authorities are the final fact finding authorities. Thus, the finding to be made by such appellate authorities with reference to the documents and evidences are of paramount importance for the purpose of exercise of judicial review by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
9. The point of delay may be an acceptable ground for the purpose of entertaining a Writ Petition. The practise of filing the Writ Petition without exhausting the statutory remedies are in ascending mode and such Writ Petitions are filed with a view to avoid pre-deposits to be made in statutory appeals and on the ground that the appellate remedies are time consuming.
10. In view of the facts and circumstances, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal before the Jurisdictional Appellate Authority in the prescribed format and by complying with the provisions of the Act, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Appellate Authority, in the event of receiving any appeal from the petitioner, shall consider the same on merits and in accordance with law and by affording an opportunity to the writ petitioner and dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible.
11. With the above directions, the writ petition stands
disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Svn
To
Copy to:-
The Section Officer, ER Section, High Court, Madras
(To return the original impugned order to the Counsel on record)
+1cc to Mr.R.Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.38874 +1cc to the Government Pleader (Taxes), S.R.No.38997
WP 8195 of 2014
GPL(CO) CT/25/08/2021
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 can be entertained before exhausting the statutory appellate remedy in tax assessment cases involving disputed facts.
Whether mere violation of principles of natural justice constitutes sufficient ground for dispensing with the appellate remedy before a High Court.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Dennis Steels Pvt Ltd.
The Commercial Tax Officer, Arakkonam Assessment Circle
The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
S.M.Subramaniam
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
