https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190946 Writ petitions challenging show cause notices under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 were held not maintainable because the Act provided a complete code with notice, hearing, assessment, appeal and revision. The Court applied the settled rule that Article 226 jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised where an adequate and efficacious statutory remedy exists. It found no recognised exception on the pleadings, including no fundamental-rights breach, constitutional challenge, lack of legislative competence, inefficacious remedy, or public injury. The statutory appeal was not treated as onerous because the pre-deposit requirement was limited and could be waived or relaxed, so the petitioners were relegated to the departmental and appellate remedies. en-us Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Mar 2017 17:34:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190946 Writ petitions challenging show cause notices under the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 were held not maintainable because the Act provided a complete code with notice, hearing, assessment, appeal and revision. The Court applied the settled rule that Article 226 jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised where an adequate and efficacious statutory remedy exists. It found no recognised exception on the pleadings, including no fundamental-rights breach, constitutional challenge, lack of legislative competence, inefficacious remedy, or public injury. The statutory appeal was not treated as onerous because the pre-deposit requirement was limited and could be waived or relaxed, so the petitioners were relegated to the departmental and appellate remedies. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190946