Article 226 - High Court Has To Deal With Grounds/Issues Raised In A Writ Petition And Pass Reasoned Order : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that it is the duty of a court to deal with issues/grounds raised in a writ petitions and thereafter to pass a reasoned order.

"When the Constitution confers on the High Courts the power to give relief it becomes the duty of the Courts to give such relief in appropriate cases and the Courts would be failing to perform their duty if relief is refused without adequate reasons.", the bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna observed.

The court was considering appeals filed against judgments of the Bombay High Court dismissing writ petitions that challenged the reopening of the assessment/re­assessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act.

The Apex Court bench noted that, except stating that 'we are not inclined to entertain writ petition', the High Court had not dealt with any of the grounds raised in the writ petitions and there is no discussion at all on any of the grounds raised in the writ petitions.  

"The manner in which the High Court has dealt with and disposed of the writ petitions without passing any reasoned order is not appreciated by this Court. When a number of issues/grounds were raised in the writ petitions, it was the duty cast upon the court to deal with the same and thereafter, to pass a reasoned order. When the Constitution confers on the High Courts the power to give relief it becomes the duty of the Courts to give such relief in appropriate cases and the Courts would be failing to perform their duty if relief is refused without adequate reasons.", the court observed.

Referring to observations made in decisions viz. Central Board of Trustees Vs. Indore Composite Private Limited (2018) 8 SCC 443, Union Public Service Commission Vs. Bibhu Prasad Sarangi  (2021) 4 SCC 516, the court, while allowing the appeal, observed:

Applying the law laid by this Court in the aforesaid decisions to the facts of the case on hand and the manner in which the High Court has disposed of the writ petitions, in the interest of sobriety, we may only note that the orders are bereft of reasoning as diverse grounds were urged/raised by the parties which ought to have been examined by the High Court in the first place and a clear finding was required to be recorded upon analysing the relevant documents.. Since we cannot countenance the manner in which the orders have been passed by the High Court which has compelled us to remand the matter to the High Court for deciding the writ petitions afresh on merits, we do so in light of the aforesaid observations

Case details

Vishal Ashwin Patel vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 25(3) | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 322 | CA 2200 OF 2022 | 28 March 2022

Coram: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna

Counsel: Adv Devendra Jain for appellants, Adv Balbir Singh for Respondent-Revenue

Headnotes

Constitution of India, 1950 ; Article 226 - When a number of issues/grounds were raised in the writ petitions, it is the duty cast upon the court to deal with the same and thereafter, to pass a reasoned order. When the Constitution confers on the High Courts the power to give relief it becomes the duty of the Courts to give such relief in appropriate cases and the Courts would be failing to perform their duty if relief is refused without adequate reasons. [Referred to Central Board of Trustees Vs. Indore Composite Private Limited, (2018) 8 SCC 443, Union Public Service Commission Vs. Bibhu Prasad Sarangi and Ors., (2021) 4 SCC 516 ] (Para 2.1)

Summary - Appeal against Bombay HC judgments dismissing writ petitions reopening of the assessment/re­assessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act - Allowed - Orders are bereft of reasoning as diverse grounds were urged/raised by the parties which ought to have been examined by the High Court in the first place and a clear finding was required to be recorded upon analysing the relevant documents - Remanded.

Click here to Read/Download Judgment