https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768716 Writ petitions challenging orders under the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act were declined because an efficacious statutory appeal was available under the tax statute. The Court distinguished maintainability from entertainability: the existence of an alternate remedy did not make the writ petition non-existent, but it justified refusal to exercise writ jurisdiction. In tax matters, the normal rule remains exhaustion of the statutory remedy, subject only to limited exceptions. Allegations of lack of proper notice or hearing did not displace that rule on the facts noted, as the petitioners were treated as aware of the proceedings. The proper course was to pursue the statutory appeal remedy. en-us Thu, 03 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Apr 2025 08:39:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768716 Writ petitions challenging orders under the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax Act were declined because an efficacious statutory appeal was available under the tax statute. The Court distinguished maintainability from entertainability: the existence of an alternate remedy did not make the writ petition non-existent, but it justified refusal to exercise writ jurisdiction. In tax matters, the normal rule remains exhaustion of the statutory remedy, subject only to limited exceptions. Allegations of lack of proper notice or hearing did not displace that rule on the facts noted, as the petitioners were treated as aware of the proceedings. The proper course was to pursue the statutory appeal remedy. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Thu, 03 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768716