https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403913 Where assessment orders show that objections on purchases from cancelled dealers and mismatch in returns were examined on the available materials, writ jurisdiction should not be used to reappreciate the factual conclusions. The court found that the assessments were passed after considering the reply and documents produced, not by summary rejection of the assessee's case. As an efficacious statutory appeal was available under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and no exceptional ground justified bypassing it, interference under Article 226 was unwarranted. The assessee was therefore relegated to the appellate remedy, and the writ challenge to the assessments was not maintainable. en-us Fri, 05 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Feb 2021 06:02:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403913 Where assessment orders show that objections on purchases from cancelled dealers and mismatch in returns were examined on the available materials, writ jurisdiction should not be used to reappreciate the factual conclusions. The court found that the assessments were passed after considering the reply and documents produced, not by summary rejection of the assessee's case. As an efficacious statutory appeal was available under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and no exceptional ground justified bypassing it, interference under Article 226 was unwarranted. The assessee was therefore relegated to the appellate remedy, and the writ challenge to the assessments was not maintainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 05 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403913