https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356183 Writ interference was declined because the clarification under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act and the consequential proposal notice did not finally liability, and the assessee still had an effective opportunity to object before the assessing authority. The dispute over commodity classification and claimed coverage under the Central Sales Tax Act had not yet become ripe for adjudication. The proper course was to pursue the available statutory remedies before the competent authorities, so the petition was not entertained at that stage. en-us Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Feb 2018 07:09:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356183 Writ interference was declined because the clarification under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act and the consequential proposal notice did not finally liability, and the assessee still had an effective opportunity to object before the assessing authority. The dispute over commodity classification and claimed coverage under the Central Sales Tax Act had not yet become ripe for adjudication. The proper course was to pursue the available statutory remedies before the competent authorities, so the petition was not entertained at that stage. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 16 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356183