Writ jurisdiction and instalment relief in sales tax matters: alternative remedy does not bar challenge to unlawful recovery.

A statutory remedy under sales tax law does not bar writ jurisdiction where the grievance is unlawful tax recovery affecting property rights under Article 226(1)(a), so the alternative-remedy objection failed. The Court also held that section 20(5) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, which empowers the appellate authority to entertain an appeal without immediate full payment or after part payment, necessarily includes the lesser power to allow tax to be paid in instalments. On that basis, instalment-based compliance fell within jurisdiction, and the impugned orders were set aside with the appeal to be decided on merits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the availability of a statutory remedy under the sales tax law barred the High Court from entertaining the writ petition under Article 226. (ii) Whether the appellate authority had jurisdiction under section 20(5) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act to permit payment of tax in instalments and to entertain the appeal on that basis.

Issue (i): Whether the availability of a statutory remedy under the sales tax law barred the High Court from entertaining the writ petition under Article 226.

Analysis: Clause (3) of Article 226 bars entertainment of a writ petition only where the injury complained of falls within clauses (b) or (c) of Article 226(1) and an alternate remedy exists. Where the grievance is that tax is being recovered in contravention of the statutory provisions, the complaint is treated as one affecting the right to hold property and thus attracting Article 226(1)(a). In that situation, the existence of another remedy does not oust the High Court's jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The preliminary objection based on alternative remedy was rejected, and the writ petition was maintainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellate authority had jurisdiction under section 20(5) of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act to permit payment of tax in instalments and to entertain the appeal on that basis.

Analysis: Section 20(5) authorises the appellate authority to entertain an appeal without payment of tax or after part payment where the dealer is unable to pay the assessed tax or penalty. The power to grant complete relief by entertaining the appeal even without immediate payment necessarily includes the lesser power to permit deferred payment by instalments. Applying the principle that the greater includes the lesser, the Court held that instalment-based payment fell within the authority's jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The appellate authority did have jurisdiction to allow payment in instalments and entertain the appeal accordingly.

Final Conclusion: The orders of the Excise and Taxation Commissioner and the Sales Tax Tribunal were set aside, and the appeal was directed to be decided on merits after compliance with the instalment conditions fixed by the appellate authority.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory power to entertain an appeal after full waiver or part payment of tax includes the lesser power to permit payment by instalments, and a writ petition is maintainable despite an alternative remedy where the grievance concerns unlawful tax recovery affecting property rights.

---