Suppression of material facts by a litigant disqualifies them from obtaining relief, reinforcing the doctrine of election which prohibits pursuing alternative remedies once a choice is made.

JUDGMENT :

MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard Shri Digvijay Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

2. The captioned writ petition has been filed inter alia, praying therein for the following reliefs:

"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned notice u/s 148 as well as the order u/s 148A(d) passed by the Opp. Party No. 2 the, the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 28.03.2024 as contained in Annexure No.1 to this Writ Petition after summoning the records.

(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of Certiorari quashing the consequential order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Act by the Opp. Party no. 3 on 10.12.2024 (Annexure No. 6) on the basis of notice issued u/s 148 by the Jurisdictional Assessing Authority (JAO) on 28.03.2024.

(c) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the Opp. Parties not to proceed with the recovery for the A.Y. 2017-18 in pursuance of the order u/s 148 dated 10.12.2024 during the pendency of this Writ Petition before this Hon'ble Court.

(d) Issue a Writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Opp. Parties to release the Bank Accounts of the Petitioner with Bank of Baroda, Circular Road, Hardoi and HDFC Bank, Indira Nagar, Lucknow during the pendency of this Writ Petition so that the Petitioner may carry on the business."

3. Upon perusal of this writ petition and after hearing learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents, it appears that against the order passed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the petitioner had filed a rectification application which has not been disclosed in the said writ petition. The above disclosure, in our view, amounts to suppression of material facts.

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s S.J.S. Business Enterprises Private Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar , 2004 (7) SCC 166, has categorically laid down the principles with regard to material facts that may amount to suppression of material facts. The relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid judgment are quoted hereinbelow:-

(13) As a general rule, suppression of a material fact by a litigant disqualifies such litigant from obtaining any relief. This rule has been evolved out of the need of the courts to deter a litigant from abusing the process of court by deceiving it. But the suppressed fact must be a material one in the sense that had it not been suppressed it would have had an effect on the merits of the case. It must be a matter which was material for the consideration of the court, whatever view the court may have taken. Thus when the liability to income tax was questioned by an applicant on the ground of her non-residence, the fact that she had purchased and was maintaining a house in the country was held to be a material fact, the suppression of which disentitled her to the relief claimed. Again when in earlier proceedings before this Court, the appellant had undertaken that it would not carry on the manufacture of liquor at its distillery and the proceedings before this Court were concluded on that basis, a subsequent writ petition for renewal of the licence to manufacture liquor at the same distillery before the High Court was held to have been initiated for oblique and ulterior purposes and the interim order passed by the High Court in such subsequent application was set aside by this Court. Similarly, a challenge to an order fixing the price was rejected because the petitioners had suppressed the fact that an agreement had been ente