https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417547 Writ interference was found unwarranted where the challenge involved limitation and fact-dependent merits under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The limitation objection was rejected by applying the statutory period under Section 37 and the Supreme Court's Covid-19 exclusion order for computation of time. On the merits, issues concerning warranty replacement, exemption, and documentary verification required appreciation of records by the appellate authority, not writ adjudication. As a statutory appeal was available, the assessee was relegated to that remedy and the writ court declined to examine the factual merits. en-us Tue, 04 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Jan 2022 15:46:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417547 Writ interference was found unwarranted where the challenge involved limitation and fact-dependent merits under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The limitation objection was rejected by applying the statutory period under Section 37 and the Supreme Court's Covid-19 exclusion order for computation of time. On the merits, issues concerning warranty replacement, exemption, and documentary verification required appreciation of records by the appellate authority, not writ adjudication. As a statutory appeal was available, the assessee was relegated to that remedy and the writ court declined to examine the factual merits. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 04 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417547