TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 576X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... UPREME COURT] , it is observed and held that in a tax matter when a statutory remedy of appeal is available, the High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Assessment Order by-passing the statutory remedy of appeal. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Assessment Order denying the benefit of Input rebate is unsustainable and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside and the original writ petitioner is to be relegated to prefer an appeal against the Assessment Order dated 28.02.2015 passed by the Divisional Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Jabalpur, which may be available under Section 46(1) of the MP VAT Act, 2002. The writ petition preferred by the respondent herein original writ petitioner assessee is hereby dismissed on the ground of alternative efficacious statutory remedy of appeal available to the respondent. - CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7170 OF 2022 - - - Dated:- 14-10-2022 - M. R. SHAH And KRISHNA MURARI , JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Sunny Choudhary , AOR For the Respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot considering any other submission on merits on whether the High Court is justified in allowing the Input rebate or not. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties at length on the entertainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the High Court against the Assessment Order and the reasoning given by the High Court while entertaining the writ petition against the Assessment Order despite the statutory remedy by way of an appeal available, we are of the opinion that the High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the Assessment Order denying the Input rebate against which a statutory appeal would be available under Section 46(1) of the MP VAT Act, 2002. 5. While entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the Assessment Order denying the Input rebate, the High Court has observed that there are no disputed question of facts arise and it is a question to be decided on admitted facts for which no dispute or enquiry into factual aspects of the matter is called for. The aforesaid can hardly be a good/valid gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Tribunal under Section 19 of the DRT Act and observed: (SCC p. 570, paras 5-6) 5. In our opinion, the order which was passed by the Tribunal directing sale of mortgaged property was appealable under Section 20 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short the Act ). The High Court ought not to have exercised its jurisdiction under Article 227 in view of the provision for alternative remedy contained in the Act. We do not propose to go into the correctness of the decision of the High Court and whether the order passed by the Tribunal was correct or not has to be decided before an appropriate forum. 6. The Act has been enacted with a view to provide a special procedure for recovery of debts due to the banks and the financial institutions. There is a hierarchy of appeal provided in the Act, namely, filing of an appeal under Section 20 and this fast-track procedure cannot be allowed to be derailed either by taking recourse to proceedings under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution or by filing a civil suit, which is expressly barred. Even though a provision under an Act cannot expressly oust the jurisdiction of the Court u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y alternative or effective remedy for the resolution of the dispute; (d) person invoking the jurisdiction is guilty of unexplained delay and laches; (e) ex facie barred by any laws of limitation; (f) grant of relief is against public policy or barred by any valid law; and host of other factors. The Court in appropriate cases in its discretion may direct the State or its instrumentalities as the case may be to file proper affidavits placing all the relevant facts truly and accurately for the consideration of the Court and particularly in cases where public revenue and public interest are involved. Such directions are always required to be complied with by the State. No relief could be granted in a public law remedy as a matter of course only on the ground that the State did not file its counter-affidavit opposing the writ petition. Further, empty and self-defeating affidavits or statements of Government spokesmen by themselves do not form basis to grant any relief to a person in a public law remedy to which he is not otherwise entitled to in law. 53. In Raj Kumar Shivhare v. Directorate of Enforcement [(2010) 4 SCC 772] the Court was dealing with the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
