M/S. ZUARI GLOBAL LTD., vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), PANAJI AND 3 ORS.,

WP/275/2017HC BombayHCBM05000356201719 April 2017Bench: F. M. REIS,HON'BLE KUM. JUSTICE NUTAN D. SARDESSAI2 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition as withdrawn. The Court granted liberty to the Petitioners to file an Appeal against the impugned Assessment Orders before the CIT Appeals in accordance with law. The Court further directed that if such Appeals are preferred within four weeks from the date of the order, the Appellate Authority shall proceed to examine the Appeal on merits without considering the point of limitation. All contentions of the parties on merits were left open.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Zuari Global Ltd., filed a Writ Petition No. 275 of 2017 before the High Court of Bombay at Goa. The petition challenged certain Assessment Orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Panaji. During the hearing, the Revenue raised a preliminary objection regarding the availability of an alternate remedy. The Revenue contended that the petitioner had an alternative remedy to challenge the impugned Assessment Orders by preferring an appeal before the appropriate Appellate Authority, citing the Supreme Court judgment in CIT vs. Chhabil Das Agarwal. The assessee sought leave to withdraw the writ petition to pursue the alternate remedy.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the High Court should entertain the Writ Petition when an alternate remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner, as per the preliminary objection raised by the Revenue? Assessee's Contention: The learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner argued that the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the Writ Petition is not barred, although they sought leave to withdraw the petition to pursue the alternate remedy. Revenue's Contention: The learned Counsel for the Revenue raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has an alternate remedy to challenge the impugned Assessment Orders by preferring an Appeal before the appropriate Appellate Authority. The Revenue relied on the Supreme Court judgment in CIT vs. Chhabil Das Agarwal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 275 OF 2017 M/S. ZUARI GLOBAL LTD., ... Petitioner Versus THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), PANAJI AND 3 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Vimal Gupta, Senior Advocate with Ms. Priyanka Kamat and Mr. Arjun Gupta, Advocates for the Petitioner. Ms. Amira Razaq, Jr. Standing Counsel for the Respondent no. 1-Revenue. Coram:- F. M. REIS & NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ. Date:- 19th April, 2017 P.C. Heard Mr. Gupta, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner and Ms. Amira Razaq, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent no. 1-Revenue. 2. During the course of the hearing of the above Writ Petition, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent-Revenue has raised a preliminary objection that the Petitioners have an alternate remedy to challenge the impugned Assessment Orders by preferring an Appeal before the appropriate Appellate Authority.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent-Revenue relies upon the Judgment reported in (2014) 1 SCC 603 in the case of CIT vs. Chhabil Das Agarwal to

2 WP/275/2017 bring to our notice the observations of the Apex Court in the said Judgment. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners accordingly seeks leave to withdraw the above Writ Petition with liberty to challenge the Assessment Orders before the CIT Appeals in accordance with law though according to the learned Senior Advocate, the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the above Petition is not barred. 4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the Petitioners to file an Appeal against the impugned Assessment Orders in accordance with law. In case such Appeals are preferred within four weeks from today, the Appellate Authority shall proceed to examine the Appeal on merits without considering the point of limitation. 5. All the contentions of the parties on merits are left open. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J. F. M. REIS, J. arp/*

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →