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 petition challenging the assessment order was maintainable in view of the statutory appellate remedy, and whether any exceptional ground such as violation of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or challenge to vires was made out.
Analysis: The assessment and revisional orders were passed under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005, and the petitioner had an efficacious statutory remedy by way of appeal. The record showed that personal hearing had been afforded, and the impugned order was a detailed speaking order. The grounds urged did not disclose breach of fundamental rights, excess of jurisdiction, or a challenge to the vires of any provision. In such circumstances, the writ court would not ordinarily interfere when the aggrieved party can raise all factual and legal pleas before the appellate authority.
Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and the challenge to the assessment order was rejected in writ jurisdiction.
Final Conclusion: The petitioner was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy, and the High Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an effective statutory appeal is available, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 will not be exercised absent exceptional circumstances such as violation of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or a vires challenge.