As per the facts of the case, the appellant had questioned the jurisdiction of the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner (ST)-cum-Revisional Authority, Kurukshetra to reopen proceedings in exercise of suo motu revisional power conferred by Section 34 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (VAT Act).
The Revision Authority had held that the Assessing Authority erred in levying tax on a product manufactured by the appellant.
Aggrieved by the order of the Revisional Authority, the appellant moved a writ petition before the High Court, which dismissed the same on the ground that the appellant had invoked Article 226 jurisdiction without exhausting the remedy of appeal provided by Section 33 of the VAT Act.
The High Court was of the view that where any right or liberty arises under a particular Act then the remedy available under that Act has to be availed.
The appellant then moved the present appeal before the apex court.
Source: Barandbench
