https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269691 A writ challenge to a revisional notice under Section 34 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, on the ground of limitation was not entertained at the writ stage because the petitioner had not first filed an objection or reply before the revisional authority. The High Court declined to quash the notice and directed the petitioner to submit a detailed objection/reply within two weeks. It further required the revisional authority to grant a hearing, decide the objection in accordance with law, and pass a speaking order within six weeks before proceeding further. Statutory remedies were left open after the revisional order. en-us Sat, 31 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Dec 2015 20:04:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269691 A writ challenge to a revisional notice under Section 34 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, on the ground of limitation was not entertained at the writ stage because the petitioner had not first filed an objection or reply before the revisional authority. The High Court declined to quash the notice and directed the petitioner to submit a detailed objection/reply within two weeks. It further required the revisional authority to grant a hearing, decide the objection in accordance with law, and pass a speaking order within six weeks before proceeding further. Statutory remedies were left open after the revisional order. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Sat, 31 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269691