TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alternate remedy. Very recently i.e., on 03.09.2021 Hon'ble Supreme Court i.e., a three member Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court speaking through Hon'ble Justice Dr.Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud in THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX AND OTHERS VERSUS M/S COMMERCIAL STEEL LIMITED [ 2021 (9) TMI 480 - SUPREME COURT] , while reiterating the aforementioned Rule of alternate remedy rule qua fiscal Statute has culled out the exceptions to alternate remedy rule and held that interference in writ jurisdiction shall be only under exceptional circumstances and there is also an adumbration of exceptional circumstances. In the case on hand, the lone point that is urged before this Court turns on NJP violation. This Court has come to the conclusion (as would be evident from the discussion and dispositive reasoning articulated supra) that alleged NJP facet violation in this case is not compelling enough. Absent compelling NJP violation, as there is no other exception (exceptions to alternate remedy rule) that arises in the case on hand, it is clear that this is a fit case to relegate the writ petitioner to alternate remedy by way of statutory appeal under Section 107 of TNGST Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the writ petitioner is the beneficiary of 'Input Tax Credit' ['ITC'] and the same has been adjusted towards outward tax liability. Learned counsel submits that this means that the objections of the writ petitioner has not been considered and objections of writ petitioner not being considered is violation of one of the facets of 'Natural Justice Principle' ['NJP']. 3. Ms.Amirta Dinakaran, learned State counsel (hereinafter 'Revenue counsel' for the sake of convenience and clarity) accepts notice on behalf of lone respondent in all the three writ petitions. Owing to the narrow compass of the captioned writ petitions and acute legal angle on which the matter turns, the main writ petitions were taken up with the consent of learned counsel on both sides. 4. In response to the aforementioned focused submission i.e., lone point urged by learned counsel for writ petitioner, learned Revenue counsel submits that it cannot be gainsaid that objections of the writ petitioner has not been considered. The objections has been taken into account and respondent vide impugned orders has in fact held that writ petitioner tax payer being beneficiary, ITC ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is a self-imposed restraint qua writ jurisdiction. However, Hon'ble Supreme Court in a long line of authorities i.e., catena of case laws has held that alternate remedy rule has to be very strictly applied i.e., with utmost rigour when it comes to fiscal Statute. This is inter-alia in Dunlop India case [Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal Vs. Dunlop India Ltd., and others reported in (1985) 1 SCC 260], Satyawati Tandon [United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon and others reported in (2010) 8 SCC 110] and K.C.Mathew [Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and another Vs. Mathew K.C. reported in (2018) 3 SCC 85]. 8. To be noted, aforementioned three case laws are illustrative not exhaustive qua long line of case laws alluded to supra. 9. Relevant paragraph in Dunlop case is paragraph No.3 and relevant portion of the same reads as follows: ' 3. ....... Article 226 is not meant to short-circuit or circumvent statutory procedures. It is only where statutory remedies are entirely ill-suited to meet the demands of extraordinary situations, as for instance where the very vires of the statute is in que ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dressal 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 the Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies available under the relevant statute. 55.It is a matter of serious concern that despite repeated pronouncement of this Court, the High Courts continue to ignore the availability of statutory remedies under the DRT Act and the SARFAESI Act and exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 for passing orders which have serious adverse impact on the right of banks and other financial institutions to recover their dues. We hope and trust that in future the High Courts will exercise their discretion in such matters with greater caution, care and circumspection.' (underlining made by this Court to supply emphasis and highlight) 11. To be noted in paragraph No.10 of K.C.Mathew's case, Satyawati Tondon principle has been extracted and reproduced. Therefore, this Court refrains itself from embarking upon the exercise of extracting and reproducing relevant paragraphs from Satyawati Tondon case law also . 12. Be that as it may, very recently i.e., on 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y rule) that arises in the case on hand, it is clear that this is a fit case to relegate the writ petitioner to alternate remedy by way of statutory appeal under Section 107 of TNGST Act and C-GST Act. 14. Before concluding, as this Court is relegating writ petitioner-dealer to alternate remedy of statutory appeal, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view or opinion on the merits of the matter. If the writ petitioner chooses to take alternate remedy route or statutory appeal under Section 107 of TN-GST Act and C-GST Act, the same will be dealt with and decided on its own merits, in accordance with law by Appellate Authority uninfluenced by any observation that is made in this order which is for the limited purpose of disposal of captioned writ petitions. Appeal will be subject to limitation and pre-deposit conditions, but this Court refrains itself from expressing any opinion on the same as all these are in the domain of the Appellate Authority. In this regard, it is open to the writ petitioner to make a plea before the Appellate Authority that the time spent in this Court in these writ petitions should be excluded (under Section 14 of Limitation Act, 1963) fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
