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

WP/277/2017HC BombayHCBM05000358201719 April 2017Bench: F. M. REIS,HON'BLE KUM. JUSTICE NUTAN D. SARDESSAI3 pages

AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Bombay at Goa, in view of the preliminary objection raised by the Revenue regarding the alternate remedy of appeal before the CIT Appeals, and considering the Petitioner's request to withdraw the writ petition, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. The Court granted liberty to the Petitioners to file an appeal against the impugned assessment orders in accordance with law. Crucially, the Court directed that if such appeals are preferred within four weeks from the date of the order, the Appellate Authority shall proceed to examine the appeals on merits without considering the point of limitation. All contentions of the parties on merits were expressly left open.

What were the facts?

This matter concerns Writ Petition No. 277 of 2017 filed by M/s. Zuari Global Ltd. (the Petitioner) against the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Panaji, and three others (the Respondents). The Petitioner sought to challenge assessment orders. During the hearing, the Revenue raised a preliminary objection regarding the availability of an alternate remedy, specifically an appeal before the appropriate Appellate Authority. The Revenue relied on the Supreme Court judgment in CIT vs. Chhabil Das Agarwal (2014) 1 SCC 603. The Petitioner, while asserting the Court's jurisdiction, sought leave to withdraw the writ petition to pursue the alternate remedy.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Petitioner has an alternate remedy to challenge the impugned Assessment Orders by preferring an Appeal before the appropriate Appellate Authority, as contended by the Revenue, thereby raising a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition? Assessee's Contention: The Petitioner's counsel sought leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to challenge the Assessment Orders before the CIT Appeals. While asserting that the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the petition is not barred, the Petitioner chose to pursue the alternate remedy. Revenue's Contention: The Respondent-Revenue 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. The Revenue relied on the judgment reported in (2014) 1 SCC 603 in the case of 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. 277 OF 2017 M/S. ZUARI GLOBAL LTD., ... Petitioner Versus THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), PANAJI AND 3 ORS., ... Respondents Ms. Priyanka Kamat, Advocate for the Petitioner. Ms. Amira Razaq, Advocate for the Respondent no. 1. Coram:- F. M. REIS & NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ. Date:- 5th May, 2017 P.C. Heard Ms. P. Kamat, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Ms. A. Razaq, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent no. 1. 2. In view of the Order dated 05.05.2017 passed in Writ Petition no. 276 of 2017, speaking to the Minutes, the following Order dated 19.04.2017 which was incorrectly uploaded in respect of Writ Petition no. 276/2017 shall be read in the present Petition as follows : "Heard Mr. Gupta, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner and Ms. Amira Razaq, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent no. 1-Revenue.

2 WP/277/2017 2. During the course of the hearing of the above Writ Petition, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent-Revenue has raised a preliminary objection hat 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 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

3 WP/277/2017 considering the point of limitation. 5. All the contentions of the parties on merits are left open." 3. In view of the above, the Petition stands disposed of accordingly. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J. F. M. REIS, J. arp/*

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →