https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436627 A writ petition under Article 226 challenging a tax demand and assessment order under the Himachal Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal under Section 45 was available and had not been filed within the prescribed limitation period. The court declined to treat the expiry of the appellate limitation as a basis for bypassing the statutory remedy, and also rejected the plea of natural justice violation as insufficient to invoke writ jurisdiction on the facts. The petition was dismissed in favour of the Revenue. en-us Thu, 13 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Apr 2023 08:37:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436627 A writ petition under Article 226 challenging a tax demand and assessment order under the Himachal Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 was held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal under Section 45 was available and had not been filed within the prescribed limitation period. The court declined to treat the expiry of the appellate limitation as a basis for bypassing the statutory remedy, and also rejected the plea of natural justice violation as insufficient to invoke writ jurisdiction on the facts. The petition was dismissed in favour of the Revenue. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 13 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436627