https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245094 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be used to sidestep a statutory appeal scheme under the Puducherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007, where appeals must be filed within thirty days and may be condoned only for a further thirty days on sufficient cause. Belated appeals that are returned and not pursued do not keep the challenge alive, and a writ filed after expiry of the outer limit cannot operate as an indirect extension of time. The assessment orders remained outside merits-based scrutiny through the statutory forum, and the writ petitions were held not maintainable. en-us Wed, 12 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Mar 2014 12:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245094 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be used to sidestep a statutory appeal scheme under the Puducherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007, where appeals must be filed within thirty days and may be condoned only for a further thirty days on sufficient cause. Belated appeals that are returned and not pursued do not keep the challenge alive, and a writ filed after expiry of the outer limit cannot operate as an indirect extension of time. The assessment orders remained outside merits-based scrutiny through the statutory forum, and the writ petitions were held not maintainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 12 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245094