https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234942 A writ petition challenging seizure of goods under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act was not entertained because the Act provided an effective statutory remedy. The Court noted that objections had already been filed before the seizing authority and rejected, while the scheme allowed a representation before the same authority and, if still aggrieved, an appeal under the Act. In view of these alternate remedies, the Court declined to examine the merits of the seizure and treated the statutory process as sufficient. en-us Wed, 26 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jul 2013 06:25:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234942 A writ petition challenging seizure of goods under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act was not entertained because the Act provided an effective statutory remedy. The Court noted that objections had already been filed before the seizing authority and rejected, while the scheme allowed a representation before the same authority and, if still aggrieved, an appeal under the Act. In view of these alternate remedies, the Court declined to examine the merits of the seizure and treated the statutory process as sufficient. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 26 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234942