https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408877 Where the Puducherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007 provides an appellate hierarchy under Sections 47, 49 and 51, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be used to bypass the statutory remedy, especially where the dispute involves mixed questions of fact and law requiring examination of documents and evidence. The High Court reiterated that judicial review is confined to the legality of the decision-making process and does not permit a trial of disputed facts at the first instance. The assessment challenge was therefore left to be pursued before the appellate forum, and the writ proceedings were disposed of without adjudication on the merits. en-us Thu, 17 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jun 2021 10:22:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408877 Where the Puducherry Value Added Tax Act, 2007 provides an appellate hierarchy under Sections 47, 49 and 51, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be used to bypass the statutory remedy, especially where the dispute involves mixed questions of fact and law requiring examination of documents and evidence. The High Court reiterated that judicial review is confined to the legality of the decision-making process and does not permit a trial of disputed facts at the first instance. The assessment challenge was therefore left to be pursued before the appellate forum, and the writ proceedings were disposed of without adjudication on the merits. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 17 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408877