https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253522 The court held that the petitioner cannot file a second writ petition challenging the same assessment orders that were previously withdrawn with liberty to pursue statutory appeals, not to file fresh writ petitions. Allowing a second writ petition would encourage abuse of the judicial process. The court clarified that the first respondent had jurisdiction to pass the assessment orders under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The assessment orders were not deemed invalid on their face, and the court found the petitioner's actions to be an abuse of the court process. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed with costs imposed on the petitioner. en-us Wed, 27 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253522 The court held that the petitioner cannot file a second writ petition challenging the same assessment orders that were previously withdrawn with liberty to pursue statutory appeals, not to file fresh writ petitions. Allowing a second writ petition would encourage abuse of the judicial process. The court clarified that the first respondent had jurisdiction to pass the assessment orders under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The assessment orders were not deemed invalid on their face, and the court found the petitioner's actions to be an abuse of the court process. Consequently, the writ petitions were dismissed with costs imposed on the petitioner. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 27 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253522