TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the assessment order was maintainable on the ground of denial of hearing and alleged lack of jurisdiction, and whether the petitioner should be relegated to the statutory appeal remedy.
Analysis: Interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is warranted where the impugned order is prima facie without jurisdiction or where there is a breach of natural justice. On the facts noted in the assessment order, the petitioner had been called upon to file a reply and the authorised representative also appeared and addressed the matter. In the absence of a sustainable assertion of denial of hearing, the challenge on natural justice grounds was not accepted. The order was also appealable under Section 55 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, 2003.
Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable for interference on the grounds urged, and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory appeal remedy.
Final Conclusion: The assessment order was not interfered with in writ jurisdiction, and the challenge was rejected in view of the available appellate remedy.
Ratio Decidendi: Writ interference is not justified where the record shows that opportunity was afforded and an efficacious statutory appeal remedy is available, unless a clear jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice is established.
TaxTMI 
