TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1014X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rule of compulsion and it is only a rule of discretion. Though it is a rule of discretion, with regard to fiscal law, the rigour is more. This Court also notices that this writ petition has been presented in this Court on 25.07.2019. Therefore, when writ petitioner goes before the said Appellate Authority (if the writ petitioner chooses to do so,) the period spent in the instant writ petition i.e., period from 25.07.2019 to the date on which the copy of the order is made available shall stand excluded. This is done as a scenario may emerge where the writ petitioner may not even have to seek condation of delay. However, this Court based on the principles adumbrated in Section 14 of Limitation Act excludes the period from 25.07.2019 to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e opportunity to the writ petitioner to show cause against the impugned order. In the instant case, there is no disputation that reasonable opportunity has been given to the writ petitioner to show cause qua the impugned order as the respondent issued a 'show cause notice dated 24.12.2018' ('SCN' for brevity) and writ petitioner sent a reply dated 07.01.2019. Thereafter respondent sent a further notice calling for certain records and the writ petitioner responded vide a letter dated 26.02.2019 and sent records which were sought for. Thereafter also there was one more notice dated 30.05.2019 from the respondent seeking certain explanation regarding 26.02.2019 reply. This 30.05.2019 notice also was responded to by the writ pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reported in [2007] 9 VST 478 (Mad) made by a Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court. 8. Adverting to paragraph 6 of the said order of Hon'ble Single Judge, learned counsel submitted that the respondent is expected to consider the objections and either accept or reject the same by giving valid reasons and by applying his mind. 9. A careful perusal of the Amutha Metals case reveals that it does not turn on the alternate remedy plea. 10. This now takes us to the stand of the learned Revenue Counsel. Learned Revenue Counsel, who has accepted notice on behalf of the sole respondent points out that writ petitioner has an effective and efficacious alternate remedy by w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ublic injury and the vindication of public justice require it, that recourse may be had to Article 226 of the constitution. But then the Court must have good and sufficient reason to bypass the alternative remedy provided by statute. Surely matters involving the revenue where statutory remedies are available are not such matters. We can also take judicial notice of the fact that the vast majority of the petitions under Article 226 of the constitution are filed solely for the purpose of obtaining interim orders and thereafter prolong the proceedings by one device or the other. This practice needs to be strongly discouraged.' (underlining made by this Court to supply emphasis and highlight) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Rule applies with greater rigour in matters involving recovery of taxes, cess, fees, other types of public money and the dues of banks and other financial institutions. In our view, while dealing with the petitions involving challenge to the action taken for recovery of the public dues, etc., the High Court must keep in mind that the legislations enacted by Parliament and State Legislatures for recovery of such dues are a code unto themselves inasmuch as they not only contain comprehensive procedure for recovery of the dues but also envisage constitution of quasi-judicial bodies for redressal of the grievance of any aggrieved person. Therefore, in all such cases, the High Court must insist that before availing remedy under Article 226 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ooses to do so,) the period spent in the instant writ petition i.e., period from 25.07.2019 to the date on which the copy of the order is made available shall stand excluded. This is done as a scenario may emerge where the writ petitioner may not even have to seek condation of delay. However, this Court based on the principles adumbrated in Section 14 of Limitation Act excludes the period from 25.07.2019 to the date on which copy of instant order is made available to the writ petitioner for the purpose of enabling the writ petitioner to avail alternate remedy by way of statutory appeal before said Appellate Authority. 15. Notwithstanding this exclusion, if it becomes necessary for the writ petitioner to seek condonation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
