https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155692 A writ petition challenging an order under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 was held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal lay under section 39, and writ jurisdiction under article 226 should ordinarily not be invoked before exhausting that remedy. The Court also noted that the dispute involved appreciation of evidence, which made recourse to the statutory forum more appropriate. The constitutional challenge to section 25(5) under article 14 was rejected because no pleaded foundation or substantiated argument supported it. The Court therefore declined to interfere at that stage and left the petitioner to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. en-us Fri, 23 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Sep 2013 16:37:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155692 A writ petition challenging an order under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 was held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal lay under section 39, and writ jurisdiction under article 226 should ordinarily not be invoked before exhausting that remedy. The Court also noted that the dispute involved appreciation of evidence, which made recourse to the statutory forum more appropriate. The constitutional challenge to section 25(5) under article 14 was rejected because no pleaded foundation or substantiated argument supported it. The Court therefore declined to interfere at that stage and left the petitioner to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 23 Jun 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155692