https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163525 Availability of an appellate remedy was treated as an adequate alternative to writ jurisdiction, and the presence of a pre-deposit requirement did not by itself make that remedy ineffective; no exceptional circumstance justified bypassing the statutory forum, so the writ petition was not entertained. On input-tax credit, the VAT scheme was read as allowing credit only where purchased goods remain within the taxable chain and give rise to output-tax liability. Rule 21(1) and (2) of the Punjab VAT Rules, which deny credit when goods are lost, destroyed, damaged or otherwise unavailable for sale, were found consistent with the Act and the challenge to their vires failed. en-us Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Nov 2014 12:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163525 Availability of an appellate remedy was treated as an adequate alternative to writ jurisdiction, and the presence of a pre-deposit requirement did not by itself make that remedy ineffective; no exceptional circumstance justified bypassing the statutory forum, so the writ petition was not entertained. On input-tax credit, the VAT scheme was read as allowing credit only where purchased goods remain within the taxable chain and give rise to output-tax liability. Rule 21(1) and (2) of the Punjab VAT Rules, which deny credit when goods are lost, destroyed, damaged or otherwise unavailable for sale, were found consistent with the Act and the challenge to their vires failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163525