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 appeal was maintainable despite the availability of an alternate statutory remedy, and whether the assessment order called for interference and remand for fresh consideration.
Analysis: The assessment was made in a scrutiny proceeding under Section 22(3) of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, but the assessing authority proceeded on a presumption that most bills would show sale price lower than purchase price and treated the discount as part of the sale consideration. The writ petition had remained pending for a long period under interim protection. In such a situation, the rule of alternate remedy was treated as a self-imposed restriction and the long pendency of the matter brought the case within the recognized exception to that rule. Since the assessment required definite findings on the records and the dealer had submitted objections and documents, a fresh opportunity and proper verification were necessary.
Conclusion: The writ appeal was allowed, the assessment was set aside for fresh consideration, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment after giving the dealer an opportunity of hearing and verification of records.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory alternate remedy exists, writ jurisdiction may still be exercised in exceptional cases, including where the matter has remained pending for a substantial period and the impugned assessment is founded on an unverified presumption rather than a definite factual conclusion.