https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160292 An efficacious statutory appeal was held to bar direct writ challenge to the penalty order, so the petitioners were required to pursue the appellate remedy instead. Rule 19(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Rules was also upheld because the reference to the "date of issue" was construed as effective service of notice, not merely the date printed on the notice, and the rule did not require the hearing to be completed within that period. The adjournment power under rule 19(3) preserved a fair opportunity of hearing, so the challenge based on denial of natural justice failed. en-us Mon, 03 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Dec 2013 18:47:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160292 An efficacious statutory appeal was held to bar direct writ challenge to the penalty order, so the petitioners were required to pursue the appellate remedy instead. Rule 19(1) of the Bihar Sales Tax Rules was also upheld because the reference to the "date of issue" was construed as effective service of notice, not merely the date printed on the notice, and the rule did not require the hearing to be completed within that period. The adjournment power under rule 19(3) preserved a fair opportunity of hearing, so the challenge based on denial of natural justice failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 03 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160292