https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335780 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was found inappropriate where the assessment and rectification disputes under the KVAT Act turned on disputed factual questions, including estimation, document consideration, and reliance on audit material, which were matters for the statutory appellate forums. The Court noted that notice had been issued and the assessee had participated, so the natural justice challenge did not justify bypassing alternative remedies. Filing a rectification application did not bar a statutory appeal, and in the absence of exceptional grounds such as lack of notice or a serious vires challenge, the writ petitions were not maintainable and were dismissed. en-us Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Mar 2018 11:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335780 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was found inappropriate where the assessment and rectification disputes under the KVAT Act turned on disputed factual questions, including estimation, document consideration, and reliance on audit material, which were matters for the statutory appellate forums. The Court noted that notice had been issued and the assessee had participated, so the natural justice challenge did not justify bypassing alternative remedies. Filing a rectification application did not bar a statutory appeal, and in the absence of exceptional grounds such as lack of notice or a serious vires challenge, the writ petitions were not maintainable and were dismissed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335780