https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237524 Writ jurisdiction was declined where the petitioners had efficacious statutory remedies under the UP Value Added Tax Act, 2008, including representation for release on security, appeal and recourse to the Tribunal. The challenge to detention and valuation of goods also failed because the power to constitute a committee of officers for valuation was held traceable to the statutory scheme governing seizure, valuation and release. The Court found no shown prejudice and rejected the apprehension that the assessing authority would not apply an independent mind merely because of the committee report. The writ petition was therefore dismissed. en-us Fri, 20 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Sep 2013 08:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237524 Writ jurisdiction was declined where the petitioners had efficacious statutory remedies under the UP Value Added Tax Act, 2008, including representation for release on security, appeal and recourse to the Tribunal. The challenge to detention and valuation of goods also failed because the power to constitute a committee of officers for valuation was held traceable to the statutory scheme governing seizure, valuation and release. The Court found no shown prejudice and rejected the apprehension that the assessing authority would not apply an independent mind merely because of the committee report. The writ petition was therefore dismissed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 20 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237524