LALAN SAN Vs. RAM BABU PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by an order of assessment dated 3.1.1997 for the assessment year 1992 -93 passed under Sec. 9(2) and 2(A) of the Central Sales Tax Act read with Sec. 17(2) of the Bihar Finance Act by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

(2.) AT the threshhold, Mrs. I. Senchoudhary, learned S.C.I., has raised a preliminary objection as regards maintainability of this writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy of appeal as well as revision. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has, in this connection, submitted that the petitioner cannot file an appeal without depositing 20% of the demand so raised under the assessment order. His contention is that the petitioner does not have the fund to deposit 20% of the demand on account of which it is just not possible to file the appeal. It is further submitted that as question of law is involved in this case, this Court should decide the writ petition on merits instead of relegating the petitioner to the alternative forum. The learned S.C.I. in reply submits that the petitioner is not a petty dealer and it can very well file the appeal after depositing 20% of the demand. It is further submitted by her that if the petitioner does not want to file an appeal, It is open to it file a revision which can be filed without any initial deposit of the demand or part thereof.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the parties have cited case laws in support of their respective submissions as regards alternative remedy. It is not necessary to cite all those cases in this judgment and it is sufficient to take note of only a few of them for the purpose of this case. In Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, Chandan Nagar, West Bengal V/s. Dunlop India Ltd. - - , Supreme Court has laid down as follows: 3...Article 226 is not meant to short -circuit or circumvent procedures. It is only where statutory remedies are entirely ill -suited to meet the demands of extraordinary situations, as for instance where the very vires of the statute is in question or where private or public wrongs are so inextricably mixed up and the prevention of public injury and the vindication of public justice require it that recourse may be had to Article 226 of the Constitution. But then the Court must have good and sufficient reason to by pass the alternative remedy provided by statute. Surely matter involving the revenue where statutory remedies are available are not such matters.... In the State of Goa V/s. Leukoplat (India) Ltd. - - the Supreme Court reiterated that it is not open to the assessee to by -pass the statutory remedies under the Sales Tax Act and approach the High Court with the writ petition.