JUDGMENT T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J. 1. By consent of the learned counsel on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. Heard Mrs. Radhika Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. A.R. Jayaprathap, learned Government Advocate for the respondents. 3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking to quash the impugned order in R.P. No. 36 of 2014 dated 28.08.2014, passed by the 1st respondent, as it is violative of proviso to Section 27 of the TNVAT Act; Circular No. 7 of 2014 dated 03.02.2014 and contrary to Section 19 of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act 2006 and Rules made thereunder. 4. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and the Central Sales Tax, 1956. The order impugned in this writ petition is the order passed on the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the provisional assessment order passed by the Joint Commissioner (CT), Chennai Central Division, Chennai-6 dated 28.08.2014. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner made elaborate submissions, stating that revisional authority has not taken into consideration the ground as well as additional ground raised by the petitioner and even assuming that the petitioner has not filed annexure-5, it can only be treated as procedural infirmity and ITC in terms of Section 19 being beneficial provision cannot be wiped out simply based on the procedural infirmity. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner also raised several factual contentions in support of her claim. At the very outset, it is to be pointed out that as against the impugned proceedings, appeal lies before the Additional Commissioner (CT). In my view, there is no sufficient ground to bypass the appellate remedy available to the petitioner under the Act and it is open to the petitioner to raise all the factual and legal contentions as against the impugned order before the appellate authority. 7. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that at this stage of the matter, the impugned order cannot be interfered with by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 8. Accordingly, while declining the relief sought for in this writ petition, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file appeal before the Additional Commissioner (CT). 8. Accordingly, while declining the relief sought for in this writ petition, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file appeal before the Additional Commissioner (CT). If any such appeal is filed within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the appellate authority shall entertain the appeal without reference to limitation. 9. Registry is directed to return the original impugned order to the petitioner after retaining the Photostat copy. 10. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.