https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433549 An alternative statutory appeal is not an absolute bar to writ jurisdiction under Article 226, especially where the challenge is jurisdictional or concerns an action said to be without authority. The High Court should not reject such a petition mechanically for non-exhaustion of remedy. Under section 34 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, suo motu revision is confined to orders prejudicial to the State and affected by illegality or impropriety; it cannot reopen an issue already finally settled by a binding appellate decision. The earlier Tribunal ruling on classification and tax rate was therefore treated as binding on the assessing and revisional authorities. en-us Wed, 01 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Jun 2026 18:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433549 An alternative statutory appeal is not an absolute bar to writ jurisdiction under Article 226, especially where the challenge is jurisdictional or concerns an action said to be without authority. The High Court should not reject such a petition mechanically for non-exhaustion of remedy. Under section 34 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, suo motu revision is confined to orders prejudicial to the State and affected by illegality or impropriety; it cannot reopen an issue already finally settled by a binding appellate decision. The earlier Tribunal ruling on classification and tax rate was therefore treated as binding on the assessing and revisional authorities. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Wed, 01 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433549