TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
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 should be entertained despite the availability of an efficacious statutory appeal, and whether liberty should be granted to pursue the appellate remedy with consequential indulgence on limitation.
Analysis: The assessment dispute arose in a fiscal matter where the petitioner had already filed revised returns and later challenged the assessment in writ jurisdiction. The Court found that the petitioner had an effective statutory remedy before the appellate authority and that the grounds raised could be urged there. It also noted that the factual setting was not one warranting immediate writ interference and that the petitioner could raise all factual and legal contentions before the appellate forum. In view of the limitation position and the surrounding circumstances, the Court granted indulgence for filing the appeal within the time indicated and directed the appellate authority to consider it on merits after affording an opportunity of personal hearing.
Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained on merits and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory appeal, with liberty granted to file the appeal within the stipulated period and have it decided in accordance with law.
Final Conclusion: The dispute was relegated to the appellate authority, and the High Court declined substantive writ adjudication while preserving the petitioner's right to pursue the statutory remedy.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious statutory appeal is available in a fiscal matter, the writ jurisdiction will ordinarily not be invoked to bypass the appellate mechanism, and the aggrieved party must first pursue the prescribed remedy.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
