https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275225 The writ petition was declined because an effective statutory appeal remedy was available, and the pre-deposit requirement did not justify bypassing it. The assessment order was found to be within the assessing authority's competence under the Madhya Pradesh VAT Act and the Entry Tax Act, so no patent lack of jurisdiction was shown for interference under Article 226. The deemed assessment fiction under Section 20-A(1B) was treated as limited in scope and not extending to exclude the remaining assessment powers under Section 20. The challenge that the order was antedated was left for consideration by the appellate authority. en-us Sun, 10 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Sep 2018 07:33:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275225 The writ petition was declined because an effective statutory appeal remedy was available, and the pre-deposit requirement did not justify bypassing it. The assessment order was found to be within the assessing authority's competence under the Madhya Pradesh VAT Act and the Entry Tax Act, so no patent lack of jurisdiction was shown for interference under Article 226. The deemed assessment fiction under Section 20-A(1B) was treated as limited in scope and not extending to exclude the remaining assessment powers under Section 20. The challenge that the order was antedated was left for consideration by the appellate authority. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Sun, 10 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275225