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 VAT assessment order should be entertained despite the availability of an appellate remedy, and whether conditional protection against recovery could be granted pending appeal.
Analysis: An effective alternative remedy was available before the appellate tribunal. The petitioner's challenge was nonetheless noted as raising a dispute on liability to pay VAT on tug-boats and marine crafts, with a request for protection against recovery pending appeal. In view of the availability of the statutory appellate remedy, the writ court declined to examine the merits, but permitted the petitioner to pursue the appeal and protected it from recovery of the disputed tax on condition of deposit of 25% of the disputed amount within the stipulated time.
Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained on merits, and relief was confined to permitting recourse to the appellate tribunal with conditional restraint on recovery.
Final Conclusion: The challenge was left to be pursued before the appellate forum, and the writ proceedings stood disposed of with limited protective directions.
Ratio Decidendi: Where an effective alternative statutory remedy is available, writ jurisdiction ordinarily need not be invoked for adjudication on merits, though limited interim protection may be granted in appropriate cases.