<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2021 (10) TMI 318 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413266</link>
    <description>In fiscal matters under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised where an effective statutory appeal under Section 51 is available, and mixed questions of fact and law are better addressed in appeal. The recognised exceptions to the alternate-remedy rule, including breach of fundamental rights, violation of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or challenge to vires, were not established on the facts. The assessment-related writ petition was therefore held not maintainable, and the petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. The plea concerning exclusion of time for limitation was left open for the appellate authority if an appeal is filed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2021 10:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=657947" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 318 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413266</link>
      <description>In fiscal matters under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised where an effective statutory appeal under Section 51 is available, and mixed questions of fact and law are better addressed in appeal. The recognised exceptions to the alternate-remedy rule, including breach of fundamental rights, violation of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or challenge to vires, were not established on the facts. The assessment-related writ petition was therefore held not maintainable, and the petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. The plea concerning exclusion of time for limitation was left open for the appellate authority if an appeal is filed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413266</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>