https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161915 A writ petition remained maintainable where the impugned revisional order was challenged as without jurisdiction, so the existence of an alternative appellate remedy did not bar review. The revisional authority could not invoke revisional power under the repealed Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 after the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 came into force, because the later Act expressly repealed the earlier regime and saved only pending applications, appeals, revisions and other proceedings. That specific saving displaced the general saving under the Punjab General Clauses Act, 1898. As no revision was pending when the new Act commenced, revisional jurisdiction could not be initiated over concluded matters. en-us Mon, 21 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 May 2024 18:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161915 A writ petition remained maintainable where the impugned revisional order was challenged as without jurisdiction, so the existence of an alternative appellate remedy did not bar review. The revisional authority could not invoke revisional power under the repealed Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973 after the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 came into force, because the later Act expressly repealed the earlier regime and saved only pending applications, appeals, revisions and other proceedings. That specific saving displaced the general saving under the Punjab General Clauses Act, 1898. As no revision was pending when the new Act commenced, revisional jurisdiction could not be initiated over concluded matters. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 21 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161915