https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160568 A writ petition challenging a revisional order under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 was said to be barred where an efficacious statutory appeal lay to the Sales Tax Tribunal under section 39, followed by a further reference remedy. The commentary explains that a contrary view taken by the Tribunal in another assessee's case did not render the statutory remedy ineffective, because that view was not binding in the present matter and the petitioner could still raise the issue before the Tribunal. In revenue matters, article 226 cannot be used to bypass the procedure provided by the statute, and the writ petition was therefore not maintainable. en-us Mon, 08 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Dec 2013 14:19:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160568 A writ petition challenging a revisional order under the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 was said to be barred where an efficacious statutory appeal lay to the Sales Tax Tribunal under section 39, followed by a further reference remedy. The commentary explains that a contrary view taken by the Tribunal in another assessee's case did not render the statutory remedy ineffective, because that view was not binding in the present matter and the petitioner could still raise the issue before the Tribunal. In revenue matters, article 226 cannot be used to bypass the procedure provided by the statute, and the writ petition was therefore not maintainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 08 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=160568