Statutory alternative remedy bars writ review; revised assessment, retrospective amendment, and notice service objections all failed.

Where an effective statutory appeal or revision is available against a tax assessment, writ jurisdiction will ordinarily not be invoked, and the writ challenge failed on that ground. The amended revision provision was construed to apply to assessments made for earlier periods as well, because it authorised revision of "any assessment made" and operated on existing assessments within the prescribed time limit; the retrospectivity objection therefore failed. Alleged non-service of notices did not vitiate the proceedings, as notices were sent to the registered place of business, repeated opportunities were given, and there was no legal duty to notify every adjournment or use any other address. The challenge failed on natural justice grounds, and the application was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petition was not maintainable in view of the alternative statutory remedy of appeal or revision; (ii) Whether the amendment to the revision provision could be applied to an assessment relating to an earlier period; (iii) Whether the assessment/revision proceedings were vitiated for breach of natural justice on the ground of alleged non-service of notices.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petition was not maintainable in view of the alternative statutory remedy of appeal or revision.

Analysis: The statutory scheme provided an appeal against assessment and also a revision remedy. A revised assessment was treated as an assessment in substance, and the existence of a prescribed statutory remedy excluded direct resort to the constitutional writ jurisdiction. The petitioner had in fact previously invoked the revision jurisdiction, which reinforced the availability of the remedy.

Conclusion: The objection based on alternative remedy succeeded, and the writ petition was not maintainable on that ground.

Issue (ii): Whether the amendment to the revision provision could be applied to an assessment relating to an earlier period.

Analysis: The amended provision empowered revision of "any assessment made" and was read as covering assessments made for prior periods as well. The relevant rule also permitted revision of assessments made before commencement of the amendment within the specified time limit. The amendment was therefore treated as operating on existing assessments rather than impermissibly creating a retrospective liability.

Conclusion: The amendment validly applied to the earlier assessment, and the challenge on the ground of retrospectivity failed.

Issue (iii): Whether the assessment/revision proceedings were vitiated for breach of natural justice on the ground of alleged non-service of notices.

Analysis: Notices were sent to the registered place of business, which remained the address on record, and there was no legal duty to serve notices at any other place. The authorities were not obliged to carry on correspondence or intimate every adjournment. The material showed repeated opportunities being given, and any ex parte order resulted from the petitioner's own lack of diligence rather than any procedural unfairness.

Conclusion: There was no violation of natural justice, and this challenge failed.

Final Conclusion: The application was held to be unsustainable on all grounds and was dismissed, with the interim orders vacated.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an effective statutory appeal or revision is available, writ jurisdiction will ordinarily not be invoked to challenge a tax assessment, and service at the registered place of business satisfies the authority's obligation absent a legally recognised change of address.

---