IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI WRIT PETITION No.7712 OF 2019 (T-RES) Between:
M/s Adarsh Developers No.10, Vittal Mallya Road Bengaluru-560 001 Represented by its Managing Partner Shri. B.M. Jayeshanker Petitioner (By Sri Cherian Punnoose for Sri Anil Kumar B. Advocates) And:
1. Union of India Through the Secretary Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Government of India North Block New Delhi-110 001 2. Central Board of Excise & Customs Through the Chairman North Block New Delhi-110 001 3. The Commissioner of Central Tax Audit I Commissionerate TTMC, BMTC Building Banashankari Bengaluru-560 070 Respondents (By Smt. Vanita K.R. Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Excise & Customs for R-2 & R-3:
ASG served but unrepresented) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 9.10.2018/15.10.2018 passed by R-3 vide Annexure-A to the W.P. and etc., This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. In this writ petition, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:
“a) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the Order No.14 & 15/2018-19 (CTA-1) dated 09.10.2018/15.10.2018 passed by Respondent No.3 vide Annexure-A to the writ petition.
b) Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that impugned Annexure-A dated 9.10.2018 is in violation of Principle of natural justice. On such sole ground, writ petition cannot be entertained. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Jammu and Kashmir vs.
R.K. Zalpuri & others reported in AIR 2016 SC 3006 at para 20 held as under:
20. Having stated thus, it is useful to refer to a passage from City and Industrial Development Corporation vs. Dosu Aardeshir Bhiwandiwala and Others[6], wherein this Court while dwelling upon jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, has expressed thus:-
“The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 is duty- bound to consider whether:
(a) adjudication of writ petition involves any complex and disputed questions of facts and whether they can be satisfactorily resolved;
(b) the petition reveals all material facts;
(c) the petitioner has any 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.”
4. In view of the Principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Jammu and Kashmir cited supra, petitioner’s contention cannot be appreciated to overcome Statutory remedy.
5. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of as it is premature by reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach appropriate authority under statutory provision. In such an event, Appellate Authority shall consider the grievance of the petitioner at the earliest.
6. Time spent by the petitioner before this Court shall be taken into consideration for the purpose of condonation of delay in presenting the statutory appeal or representation.
With above observation, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE HR