HC Declines Interference in VAT Matters; Directs Appeal Before Tribunal
A batch of appeals arose from a common order of the Single Judge dealing with multiple writ petitions concerning VAT assessments in the Andaman & Nicobar Islands. The Single Judge had transferred petitions filed before 19 August 2025 to the VAT Appellate Tribunal, while dismissing later petitions citing the availability of an alternative remedy. The appellants, including hotels and other businesses, challenged assessment notices issued in December 2024, arguing they were time-barred, procedurally flawed, and passed in breach of natural justice.
ITAT Deletes Section 68 Additions Once Identity, Creditworthiness & Genuineness Are Proven
They also questioned the effectiveness of the appellate remedy, claiming the absence of a proper procedural framework. The State countered that the VAT procedure became operational only in December 2020, with a grace period for return filing till March 2021, and therefore limitation had to be computed accordingly. It also maintained that the Appellate Tribunal was duly constituted and functional.
Central Issue: Whether writ petitions were maintainable despite availability of a statutory appellate remedy, and whether the assessment notices were invalid due to limitation, procedural lapses, or breach of natural justice.
related id=”410604″]
HC Held: The Division Bench upheld the Single Judge’s view and declined to interfere. It reiterated that writ jurisdiction should not be exercised where an effective statutory remedy exists. The Court found the VAT Appellate Tribunal to be properly constituted and competent to examine all issues, including limitation and procedural irregularities.
It observed that questions relating to limitation involved mixed facts and law, making them more suitable for adjudication by the Tribunal. It also noted that the appellants had participated in the proceedings and were given opportunities of hearing, which weakened their claim of violation of natural justice. Finding no error in the earlier judgment, the Court dismissed the appeals and directed the appellants to pursue remedies before the Tribunal.
To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below