Limitation for assessment appeals runs from service of the notice, and writ relief cannot bypass an available statutory appeal.

Where the appellate statute fixes limitation from service of the notice of assessment, that service date alone governs the time to appeal, even if the rules also require a copy of the assessment order to be served. A rule cannot override the Act, so an appeal filed beyond that period is time-barred. The High Court also noted that writ jurisdiction will not ordinarily interfere with a plausible finding that an appeal is time-barred, nor be used to bypass an statutory appeal or reopen factual issues, including disputed service, that were not shown to be plainly wrong.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the limitation period for an appeal against an assessment commenced from service of the notice of assessment or from service of a copy of the assessment order, (ii) whether the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred could be interfered with in writ jurisdiction, and (iii) whether the assessee could challenge the assessment and related proceedings despite not pursuing the statutory appeal.

Issue (i): Whether the limitation period for an appeal against an assessment commenced from service of the notice of assessment or from service of a copy of the assessment order.

Analysis: The appellate provision prescribed a period of 30 days from the date of service of the notice of assessment in the case of an assessment under section 21. The prescribed form of notice of assessment was treated as the statutory notice contemplated by the appeal provision. The requirement in the rules to serve a copy of the assessment order along with the notice did not alter the statutory starting point for limitation, because the rule could not override the Act. The service date of the notice therefore governed limitation, regardless of whether a copy of the assessment order accompanied it.

Conclusion: The limitation period commenced on service of the notice of assessment, and the appeal filed later was time-barred.

Issue (ii): Whether the dismissal of the appeal as time-barred could be interfered with in writ jurisdiction.

Analysis: The appellate authority's view that the appeal was barred by time was not shown to be manifestly erroneous. Where the authority had taken a plausible view on limitation within its jurisdiction, certiorari could not be used merely because another view was possible. The court declined to disturb the order in supervisory jurisdiction.

Conclusion: No interference in writ jurisdiction was warranted against the rejection of the appeal as time-barred.

Issue (iii): Whether the assessee could challenge the assessment and related proceedings despite not pursuing the statutory appeal.

Analysis: The assessee had an adequate statutory remedy by way of appeal but did not avail himself of it in time. In such circumstances, the extraordinary jurisdiction of the court was not to be invoked to bypass the departmental remedy. Questions depending on factual examination, including validity of service of notice, were not reopened, especially when the finding recorded below was not plainly wrong. Matters relating to recovery proceedings were also not examined because they were not directly challenged in the petition.

Conclusion: The assessee was precluded from challenging the assessment and allied matters in writ proceedings after failing to pursue the statutory appeal.

Final Conclusion: The assessment-related challenge failed because the appeal was rightly treated as barred by limitation and the extraordinary writ jurisdiction could not be used to circumvent the statutory appellate remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute fixes limitation for appeal from service of the notice of assessment, that date alone governs commencement of time, and writ relief will not ordinarily lie to bypass an available statutory appeal or to reopen factual findings not shown to be plainly wrong.

---