The Limits Of Motion: Suo Motu Meets Tax Law
- IJLLR Journal
- Aug 10
- 2 min read
Samarth Kackria, O.P Jindal Global University
Introduction (What is Suo-Moto)
Suo Moto is a power developed from jurisprudence which has been provided to the judicial branch of our country. It is a term of the Latin language and translates to “on its own motion”. This is an inherent power granted in most countries to the Highest Courts to ensure completion of justice. This is a discretionary power designated to the Apex Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The term used in the statutory provision is complete justice. This is typically utilized for cases involving public interests such as environmental cases, human or constitutional rights and cases involving interest of large masses of people. Article 32 also plays a supplementary role and helps the court in exercising such jurisdiction.
Evolution of Suo-Moto and Criticisms
The power of Suo-Moto is intended to be used sparingly and in excruciating circumstances. However, in the year 2024, the cases of Suo-moto jurisdiction were at an all-time high. In an article, it is stated that during the last 20 years 66 cases have been taken up under Suo-moto jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Out of these 66, the last 5 years, 2019-2024 account for majority of such cases. In 2024 itself, 12 cases were taken up under Suo-moto jurisdiction and the primary reason for this has been since the surge of the pandemic in 2020.
The rise shows there is a possibility of some instances of misuse of power by the Apex court. In the recent years, there has been controversy with respect to judicial activism and overreach. Another issue is regarding the veracity as in Suo-moto cases, the jurisdiction generally comes from letters of the general public and the reports from media and news. The issue with this is regarding the veracity such information that can lead to failure of justice or delays in other cases of utmost importance. There is a major argument which will be demonstrated in this article with a specific provision in the indirect tax regime. This is the separation of powers doctrine. In such Suo-moto jurisdiction, the court oversteps from their judicial function and enter the field of the executive. The critical question which this article explores is whether the SC while exercising its Suo-motu jurisdiction, can override statutory provisions which have specifically been made for certain situations. The following sections of this article will examine and analyze the same with respect to section 168-A of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
