https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413080 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is ordinarily not exercised where an efficacious statutory appeal exists under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and the alternate-remedy rule applies with greater rigour in fiscal matters. The recognised exceptions, including breach of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, violation of fundamental rights, or challenge to vires, were not made out. A personal hearing notice had been issued, the assessee responded, and books of account were produced, so reasonable opportunity was found to have been given. Any dispute over appreciation of accounts or factual findings was held to lie in appeal, and the writ petition was therefore not maintainable. en-us Mon, 27 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Oct 2021 09:01:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413080 Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is ordinarily not exercised where an efficacious statutory appeal exists under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and the alternate-remedy rule applies with greater rigour in fiscal matters. The recognised exceptions, including breach of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, violation of fundamental rights, or challenge to vires, were not made out. A personal hearing notice had been issued, the assessee responded, and books of account were produced, so reasonable opportunity was found to have been given. Any dispute over appreciation of accounts or factual findings was held to lie in appeal, and the writ petition was therefore not maintainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 27 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413080