https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293826 Where a tax statute prescribes a maximum period for filing an appeal, Article 226 writ jurisdiction cannot be used to bypass that legislative limit. The Madras HC noted that the petitioner had not exhausted the statutory remedy under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 within the permissible time, and rejected the argument that a time-barred appeal filed later could be treated differently from no appeal at all. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable, and the tax assessment order remained undisturbed because the statutory appellate scheme had been allowed to lapse. en-us Thu, 15 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2024 14:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293826 Where a tax statute prescribes a maximum period for filing an appeal, Article 226 writ jurisdiction cannot be used to bypass that legislative limit. The Madras HC noted that the petitioner had not exhausted the statutory remedy under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 within the permissible time, and rejected the argument that a time-barred appeal filed later could be treated differently from no appeal at all. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable, and the tax assessment order remained undisturbed because the statutory appellate scheme had been allowed to lapse. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Thu, 15 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293826