https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382855 Writ petitions challenging revised assessment orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and the consequential Central Sales Tax order were held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal was available under Section 51 before the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner. The High Court applied the settled rule that writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be exercised when an alternate remedy exists, with greater rigour in fiscal matters, and found no exceptional circumstance to justify interference. Objections relating to document production and personal hearing were held to be matters that could be raised in appeal, not grounds for writ intervention. en-us Wed, 03 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jul 2019 07:01:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382855 Writ petitions challenging revised assessment orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and the consequential Central Sales Tax order were held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal was available under Section 51 before the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner. The High Court applied the settled rule that writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be exercised when an alternate remedy exists, with greater rigour in fiscal matters, and found no exceptional circumstance to justify interference. Objections relating to document production and personal hearing were held to be matters that could be raised in appeal, not grounds for writ intervention. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 03 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382855