Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2016 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 426 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxConstitutional validity of Rule - KVAT - Determination of tax liability - Maintainability of writ petition - Held that:- It is hardly required to be stated that when the writ powers are invoked under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, may be, for challenging the validity of the statutory rule, this Court in normal circumstance by way of self-imposed restriction would relegate the party to the statutory, alternative remedy. The appellant/original petitioner had the option of challenging the validity of the rule when the appeals were preferred in respect of earlier assessment order before this Court in STA.Nos.120/2012 and 1-10/2013, but the appellant did not challenge the validity of the rule. Not only that, but thereafter for the subsequent assessment years, notices were issued by the Assessing Officer, but the appellant did not challenge the validity of the rule by appropriate proceedings before this Court, but appeared in response to the notice and the assessment orders were passed. Not only that, but thereafter the appellant has preferred the statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority under the KVAT Act and those appeals are pending consideration. Under these circumstances, we find that the challenge to the validity of the rule if not entertained by the learned single Judge, it cannot be said that the discretion is perversely exercised or that the learned single Judge has committed an error on the face of the record in exercise of the discretion to entertain the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. Under the circumstances, the exercise of discretion by the learned single Judge not to entertain the petition cannot be said to be erroneous, which may call for interference in exercise of the power under Article 226 of the constitution. - Decided against the petitioner.
|