Amarjit Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, Amarjit Kumar, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court. He alleged that his brother, the 4th respondent Rakesh Bharti, had acquired properties beyond his means and income. The petitioner sought consideration of representations made by the 4th respondent to the Income Tax Authorities. The respondents included the Union of India, the Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation), and an Income Tax Inspector. The court noted that the petition was motivated by sibling rivalry and that the petitioner and 4th respondent are brothers.

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable. It reasoned that there is a specific machinery provided under the Income Tax Act to deal with matters concerning income and acquisition of properties. The Court found the present writ petition to be maliciously filed with the intent to settle scores between the brothers. Therefore, the Court rejected the writ petition, declining to entertain it on its merits. No specific provisions of the GST Act were discussed or relied upon in the judgment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, should entertain a petition filed due to sibling rivalry and concerning allegations of acquiring properties beyond means, when a machinery exists under the Income Tax Act for such matters? The petitioner argued that the 4th respondent has acquired properties beyond his means and income and sought consideration of representations made by the 4th respondent to the Income Tax Authorities. The respondents, represented by the Additional Solicitor General and Senior Standing Counsel, CGST & CX, did not explicitly present arguments on the merits of the allegations but implicitly argued that the writ petition was not the appropriate forum, given the existence of statutory remedies under the Income Tax Act and the alleged malicious intent behind the filing.