Person, who’s case is based on falsehood, has no right to approach the court

Jambudwip Exports And Imports Limited Vs State of U.P (Allahabad High Court)

Petitioner submits that since the impugned assessment order has been passed without affording opportunity of hearing, therefore, the impugned assessment order deserves to be quashed.

HC find that the finding of the Assessing Officer regarding issuance of show cause notice in Form GST-DRC-01A, under Section 74(5) of the Act, 2017 requiring the petitioner to show cause and avail opportunity of personal hearing on the date, time and place fixed in the notice, has not been denied by the petitioner in the writ petition. A copy of the show cause notice requiring the petitioner to submit his reply and fixing the date, time and place for personal hearing, has been produced before us by the respondent no. 3 along with the aforesaid instructions dated 14.6.2022, in which the date, time and place for personal hearing is clearly mentioned. The fact of issuance of notice in Form GST-DRC-01 dated 14.1.2022 is clearly mentioned at internal page 12 of the impugned assessment order but the petitioner has neither filed copy of the aforesaid show cause notice nor disclosed it in the writ petition nor disputed the finding of fact recorded in the impugned order regarding issuance of said notice and affording of opportunity of personal hearing to him. Thus, the petitioner has concealed material facts of the case which also dis-entitles him to any relief in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

In the case of S.P. Chengal Varaya Naidu (dead) by L.Rs Vs. Jagannath (dead) by L.Rs and others, AIR 1994 SC 853, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held in para 7 as under:-

“7. The High Court, in our view, fell into patent error. The short question before the High Court was whether in the facts and circumstances of this case, Jagannath obtained the preliminary decree by playing fraud on the court. The High Court, however, went haywire and made observations which are wholly perverse. We do not agree with the High Court that “there is no legal duty cast upon the plaintiff to come to court with a true case and prove it by true evidence”. The principle of “finality of litigation” cannot be pressed to the extent of such an absurdity that it becomes an engine of fraud in the hands of dishonest litigants. The courts of law are meant for imparting justice between the parties. One who comes to the court, must come with clean hands. We are constrained to say that more often than not, process of the court is being abused. Property-grabbers, tax-evaders, bank-loan-dodgers and other unscrupulous persons from all walks of life find the court-process a convenient lever to retain the illegal-gains indefinitely. We have no hesitation to say that a person, who’s case is based on falsehood, has no right to approach the court. He can be summarily thrown out at any stage of the litigation.“

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.