Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the writ petition could be entertained in view of the alternate statutory remedy under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, and whether denial of opportunity or alleged illegality in the reassessment order justified bypassing the appellate remedy.
Analysis: The petitioner had been issued notices and granted extensions of time to produce books of account and documents, but did not avail the opportunity. The record therefore did not support a plea of violation of natural justice. The Court also held that even if the reassessment order was alleged to be illegal, such grievance could be raised before the appellate authority constituted under the statute. Where the Act provides an efficacious appeal under Section 62, the writ jurisdiction should not be invoked to circumvent the statutory appellate mechanism.
Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed.
Final Conclusion: The petitioner was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy, and no interference was called for in writ jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi: When an efficacious statutory appeal is available, and the party has been afforded opportunity to participate in the reassessment proceedings, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be exercised to bypass the appellate remedy.