https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155711 A provision authorising forfeiture of amounts collected in contravention of a sales tax law was treated as falling within the State's taxation field and allied procedure under List II entry 54. The Court rejected the constitutional challenge under Articles 14 and 19, holding that fiscal forfeiture is a permissible penalty mechanism and that the absence of an express refund provision does not defeat legislative competence. It also stated that, where an effective statutory appeal exists, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used to examine the merits and bypass the appellate forum. en-us Thu, 29 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Sep 2013 18:00:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155711 A provision authorising forfeiture of amounts collected in contravention of a sales tax law was treated as falling within the State's taxation field and allied procedure under List II entry 54. The Court rejected the constitutional challenge under Articles 14 and 19, holding that fiscal forfeiture is a permissible penalty mechanism and that the absence of an express refund provision does not defeat legislative competence. It also stated that, where an effective statutory appeal exists, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used to examine the merits and bypass the appellate forum. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 29 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155711