https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162728 Writ jurisdiction was declined because the reassessment challenge under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 involved disputed questions about the nature of the transaction and the terms and performance of subscriber contracts. Those factual matters were considered suitable for examination by the statutory authorities, and the existence of an appellate remedy could not be bypassed merely on an allegation of illegality in the reassessment. The court also confined its observations to the propriety of invoking writ review at that stage and did not decide the merits of the levy, leaving the assessee to pursue the statutory appeal, including any request for condonation of delay. en-us Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Mar 2014 13:02:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162728 Writ jurisdiction was declined because the reassessment challenge under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 involved disputed questions about the nature of the transaction and the terms and performance of subscriber contracts. Those factual matters were considered suitable for examination by the statutory authorities, and the existence of an appellate remedy could not be bypassed merely on an allegation of illegality in the reassessment. The court also confined its observations to the propriety of invoking writ review at that stage and did not decide the merits of the levy, leaving the assessee to pursue the statutory appeal, including any request for condonation of delay. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 16 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162728