Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2021 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 1071 - MADRAS HIGH COURTJurisdiction of impugned orders - wrongful interpretation of provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act - Section 6(2) of the CST Act - HELD THAT:- The power of judicial review conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to scrutinize the processes, through which, an adjudication is made and a decision is taken by the competent authority in consonance with the provisions of the Statute, but not the decision itself. This being the scope of judicial review in a writ proceedings, the aggrieved person at the first instance must be allowed to exhaust the Appellate remedy, which will be of much assistance even for an aggrieved person to discuss about certain business transactions and accounting details before the authority, who is well versed with such matters. The Courts are admitting writ petitions on one point, which may be convincing. However, there are many other points on facts are to be adjudicated. Keeping a writ petition pending for a longer period and not allowing a litigant to get a final decision in such matters would undoubtedly cause prejudice and hardship both to the litigant as well as the Revenue. Therefore, in such matters, where Appellate remedy is contemplated, High Court is expected to be cautious in admitting the matters in a routine manner - admitting a writ petition at one point and keep it pending for a prolonged period, then the prolongevity of the litigation would cause prejudice to the interest of the assessee and also to the Revenue as well. All the circumstances should be waived even at the admission stage by the High Courts. It is not as if, certain factual disputes can be adjudicated in a writ proceedings. Such an attempt by the High Court even may end in futile at the final hearing. This Court is of an opinion that in the present case, the petitioner has to prefer an appeal both in the interest of justice as well as in the interest of the parties to the lis on hand. Accordingly, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal before the competent Appellate authority within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in a prescribed format and by complying with the provisions of the Act and the Rules - Petition disposed off.
|