https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351284 In a challenge to a penalty order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the HC held that writ interference was not warranted where the petition was not confined to a pure jurisdictional objection and the single Judge had already examined the merits. The court noted that objections based on penalty being computed from income-tax returns, the effect of compounding, the alleged finality of acceptance of compounding, and the power to estimate under Section 67 had all been considered and answered. The appellant could not then seek relegation to statutory remedies to reopen issues already decided. The refusal to interfere in writ jurisdiction was therefore sustained. en-us Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Nov 2017 12:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351284 In a challenge to a penalty order under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, the HC held that writ interference was not warranted where the petition was not confined to a pure jurisdictional objection and the single Judge had already examined the merits. The court noted that objections based on penalty being computed from income-tax returns, the effect of compounding, the alleged finality of acceptance of compounding, and the power to estimate under Section 67 had all been considered and answered. The appellant could not then seek relegation to statutory remedies to reopen issues already decided. The refusal to interfere in writ jurisdiction was therefore sustained. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351284