https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402080 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was held unavailable where assessment orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 could have been challenged by a statutory appeal that was not filed within the prescribed limitation period. The Court applied the settled principle that an effective appellate remedy should ordinarily be pursued before invoking writ jurisdiction, and that delay beyond the maximum condonable period leaves the challenge without that alternative statutory route. The High Court therefore declined to examine the merits of the assessment dispute and dismissed the writ petitions, leaving the impugned orders undisturbed. en-us Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Dec 2020 15:08:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402080 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was held unavailable where assessment orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 could have been challenged by a statutory appeal that was not filed within the prescribed limitation period. The Court applied the settled principle that an effective appellate remedy should ordinarily be pursued before invoking writ jurisdiction, and that delay beyond the maximum condonable period leaves the challenge without that alternative statutory route. The High Court therefore declined to examine the merits of the assessment dispute and dismissed the writ petitions, leaving the impugned orders undisturbed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402080