https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405635 Alternative statutory remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where the impugned tax action was non-speaking, arbitrary, perverse, or contrary to natural justice. The High Court held that the availability of a revisional remedy with limitation does not oust Article 226 where the authority fails to give reasons or fairly consider the assessee's documents. On the facts, the compounding notice, revisional order and consequential demand were unsustainable because the revisional authority merely reproduced objections and remitted the matter without merits review, and the detention-related action lacked reasoned consideration. The impugned orders were quashed and the amount collected at release was directed to be refunded. en-us Wed, 10 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Sep 2021 13:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405635 Alternative statutory remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where the impugned tax action was non-speaking, arbitrary, perverse, or contrary to natural justice. The High Court held that the availability of a revisional remedy with limitation does not oust Article 226 where the authority fails to give reasons or fairly consider the assessee's documents. On the facts, the compounding notice, revisional order and consequential demand were unsustainable because the revisional authority merely reproduced objections and remitted the matter without merits review, and the detention-related action lacked reasoned consideration. The impugned orders were quashed and the amount collected at release was directed to be refunded. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 10 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405635