High Court directs revision petition under TNVAT Act, emphasizes interim stay. Petitioner to approach authority within 3 weeks.

The High Court directed the petitioner to file a revision petition before the revisional authority under Sections 68/69 of the TNVAT Act to address the dispute regarding a demand notice. The Court emphasized the interim stay granted, keeping the impugned order on hold. The petitioner was instructed to approach the revisional authority within three weeks, with the authority considering the previous order. The Writ Petition was disposed of with these directions, and no costs were imposed, leading to the closure of the connected Miscellaneous Petition.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to demand notice issued by the fourth respondent.
2. Jurisdiction of the High Court in the matter.
3. Alternative remedy under Section 68/69 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act (TNVAT Act).
4. Direction to approach the revisional authority for remedy under Section 57 of the TNVAT Act.
5. Interim stay granted by the High Court.

Analysis:
The Writ Petition was filed to challenge the demand notice issued by the fourth respondent, contending that it was contrary to the notification issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu and the order passed by the revisional authority. The petitioner's consignment had been detained and later released on payment of 50% of the demand amount. The Government Advocate argued that the petitioner should have first approached the revisional authority under Section 68/69 of the TNVAT Act to address the factual dispute. The Court agreed with this submission, directing the petitioner to file a revision petition before the revisional authority within three weeks. The revisional authority was instructed to consider the petition, taking into account the previous order passed by the Joint Commissioner (CT) Salem.

The Court emphasized that pending the Writ Petition, the impugned order would be kept in abeyance due to the interim stay obtained by the petitioner. It was clarified that the petitioner must file the revision petition within the specified time frame for this provision to apply. Ultimately, the Writ Petition was disposed of with the mentioned directions, and no costs were imposed. The connected Miscellaneous Petition was also closed as a consequence of the judgment.

---