https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353411 A writ challenge to a reassessment notice was treated as premature because the petitioner still had effective remedies before the revenue authorities. The Court noted that the earlier classification order had not considered the effect of Section 14(vi) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and the petitioner remained free to seek clarification from the competent authority and to argue before the assessing authority that the goods fell under Section 14(vi) rather than Section 14(iv). With those statutory contentions still open, judicial interference at that stage was unwarranted. en-us Fri, 15 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jan 2018 08:54:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353411 A writ challenge to a reassessment notice was treated as premature because the petitioner still had effective remedies before the revenue authorities. The Court noted that the earlier classification order had not considered the effect of Section 14(vi) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and the petitioner remained free to seek clarification from the competent authority and to argue before the assessing authority that the goods fell under Section 14(vi) rather than Section 14(iv). With those statutory contentions still open, judicial interference at that stage was unwarranted. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 15 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353411