https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154519 A writ petition under Article 226 was held not maintainable where appeals against the assessment orders were already pending before the statutory appellate authority, since that authority could fully examine and even enhance the assessments; the Court treated a parallel writ challenge as inappropriate at that stage. The Court also found no shown illegality in the Revenue's use of multiple statutory recovery modes, because the taxing statute expressly permitted recovery as arrears of land revenue, by application to a Magistrate, and by other mechanisms without prejudice to each other. As no specific ultra vires action or lack of authority was established, the recovery steps were not interfered with. en-us Fri, 29 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Aug 2013 18:22:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154519 A writ petition under Article 226 was held not maintainable where appeals against the assessment orders were already pending before the statutory appellate authority, since that authority could fully examine and even enhance the assessments; the Court treated a parallel writ challenge as inappropriate at that stage. The Court also found no shown illegality in the Revenue's use of multiple statutory recovery modes, because the taxing statute expressly permitted recovery as arrears of land revenue, by application to a Magistrate, and by other mechanisms without prejudice to each other. As no specific ultra vires action or lack of authority was established, the recovery steps were not interfered with. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 29 Mar 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154519