KIMS CANCER CARE AND RESEARCH CENTER PVT. LTD. Vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE MUMBAI ZONAL UNIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition from which this writ appeal arises has been filed by the appellant/petitioner seeking writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to dispose of Ext.P7 representation with the prayer that pending hearing and disposal of the writ petition, all further steps pursuant to Exts.P8 and P9 may be stayed etc. To advance the prayers in the writ petition, the appellant/petitioner has urged that Exts.P8 and P9 are in contrary to the directions in Exts.P10 and P11, wherein the respondents Directorate had clarified that the issuance of summons to the Directors and the top level officers of the companies can only be taken as a last resort in cases where the assessees are not co -operating with the investigation or the investigation that are yet to be completed. It is accordingly urged that the instructions in Exts.P10 and P11 are binding on the official respondents. It is the case of the petitioner that as per Ext.P7 representation, the petitioner has made clear that they are ready and willing to co -operate with the investigation and that there are several instances where such request as per Ext.P7 has been acceded to by the respondents. The learned single Judge, after hearing the petitioner and the standing counsel for the respondents, directed in the impugned judgment that the Director of the petitioner company mentioned in Ext.P8 shall appear before the respondent authorities at Mumbai on 24.2.2014 or on any of the date which may be fixed by the respondents after giving atleast 2 weeks time to the petitioner to comply with it and that, if the presence of the officials of the petitioner company are required for further investigation in connection with the enquiry, their presence at Mumbai or any other place shall not be insisted and the respondents shall conduct an enquiry either at Trivandrum or at Kochi. With those directions, the writ petition stood finally disposed of as per the impugned judgment.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the appellant Sri.Anil D.Nair has submitted before us that the impugned judgment has proceeded as if the petitioner is seeking writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P8 notice and that the limited request of the appellant/petitioner was only for a direction to consider and dispose Ext.P7 representation and pending consideration of the representation as per Ext.P7, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P8 and P9 may be kept in abeyance etc. The learned counsel for the appellant submits before us today that the limited prayer of the appellant/ petitioner is for a direction to the official respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P7 representation by adverting to all the contentions raised therein etc. The learned standing counsel for the respondents submits before us that there is a reference to Ext.P7 representation in Ext.P9 and that Ext.P9 is to be treated as a disposal of Ext.P7 representation. We are not satisfied with those explanations offered by the learned standing counsel for the respondents and we find that except for a reference to Ext.P7 representation in Ext.P9, none of the contentions urged by the petitioner in Ext.P7 has been adverted to and no order has been passed on Ext.P7 after considering the merits of the contentions in Ext.P7. Accordingly, we are inclined to modify the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge passed in the writ petition by limiting the prayers of the appellant strictly in terms of prayers raised by him in the writ petition. Accordingly, we direct that, the competent authority among the official respondents shall consider the request in Ext.P7 representation and advert to all the contentions raised by the petitioner in the said representation and pass a reasoned order after considering the merits of the contentions urged by the petitioner in the said representation. We also direct that a reasonable opportunity of hearing may be afforded to the petitioner through his counsel by the respondents, before they pass orders on Ext.P7. Accordingly, it is directed that within one week from the receipt of certified copy of this judgment, the competent authority among official respondents shall issue notice of hearing to the petitioner, so as to hear the petitioner's counsel on a designated day. After hearing the petitioner through his counsel, the respondent authority concerned shall advert to all the contentions of the petitioner and pass a reasoned order after due consideration of the merits of the contentions, within a further period of 3 weeks from the date of hearing of the petitioner through the counsel. With these observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of and the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge stands modified accordingly. We also direct that pending passing of orders on Ext.P7 as afore mentioned, all further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P8 and P9 shall be kept in abeyance. In the light of these directions issued in the writ petition, this writ appeal also stands finally disposed of.