https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297436 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be used to bypass the statutory appellate remedy against a Tamil Nadu VAT assessment order when the appeal was not filed within the maximum limitation period allowed by law. The assessment order remained appealable under the Act, but the petitioner had failed to pursue that remedy in time, so the High Court declined to entertain the writ petition. The separate statutory remedy of rectification was not foreclosed, and the petitioner was left free to seek any remedy independently available under the Act if otherwise entitled. en-us Thu, 10 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Sep 2021 08:28:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297436 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be used to bypass the statutory appellate remedy against a Tamil Nadu VAT assessment order when the appeal was not filed within the maximum limitation period allowed by law. The assessment order remained appealable under the Act, but the petitioner had failed to pursue that remedy in time, so the High Court declined to entertain the writ petition. The separate statutory remedy of rectification was not foreclosed, and the petitioner was left free to seek any remedy independently available under the Act if otherwise entitled. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 10 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297436