https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329770 Article 226 writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not invoked where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, because the court applies self-imposed restraint and departs from that rule only in a strong and exceptional case. The commentary notes that the dispute depended on factual determination of the character of the property and the nature of the transaction, including whether the switchyard was movable or immovable property. As that issue required assessment of evidence by the taxing authority, the writ court was justified in relegating the party to the statutory appeal under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, and intra-court interference was not warranted. en-us Mon, 21 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Jul 2016 17:14:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329770 Article 226 writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not invoked where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, because the court applies self-imposed restraint and departs from that rule only in a strong and exceptional case. The commentary notes that the dispute depended on factual determination of the character of the property and the nature of the transaction, including whether the switchyard was movable or immovable property. As that issue required assessment of evidence by the taxing authority, the writ court was justified in relegating the party to the statutory appeal under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, and intra-court interference was not warranted. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 21 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329770