Statutory revision remedy preferred over writ challenge, with interim protection against coercive recovery pending disposal.

A writ challenge to assessment-related notices and orders under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act was declined because a statutory revision under Section 59 remained available. The Court held that the petitioner should pursue that revisional remedy instead of invoking writ jurisdiction on the limitation objection raised against action under Section 56. To preserve the petitioner's position pending revision, the Court directed that no coercive steps be taken under the impugned order until the revision was decided and the order was communicated.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the assessment-related notices and orders should be entertained despite availability of revision under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003, and whether the petitioner's limitation objection required adjudication in writ jurisdiction.

Analysis: The petitioner's challenge centered on the limitation objection raised against action under Section 56 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003. The Court noted the availability of a further revision under Section 59 of the Act and considered that the petitioner could work out that remedy. To protect the petitioner's interest, the Court directed that no coercive steps be taken pursuant to the impugned order until the revision was disposed of and the order communicated.

Outcome: The writ petition was not decided on merits and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory revisional remedy, with interim protection against coercive action pending disposal of the revision.

---