Statutory classification of goods must first go through tax authorities; writ jurisdiction is a last resort.

Tarpaulins, canvas cloth and waterproof cloth were claimed to fall within "cotton fabrics" under the sales tax schedule and to be exempt from tax, but the classification was treated as a mixed question of fact and law requiring first determination by the statutory authorities under the Act. Article 226 was held not to be a substitute for the regular statutory machinery, and judicial interference was described as appropriate only as a last resort where there is an apparent error on the face of the record or lack of jurisdiction. No such ground was found, so the writ petition was not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition could be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a declaration that tarpaulins, canvas cloth and waterproof cloth fell within "cotton fabrics" under item 5 of the Fourth Schedule to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 and were exempt from sales tax under section 8 of that Act.

Analysis: The classification of the goods as "cotton fabrics" was held to be a mixed question of fact and law that should first be decided by the statutory authorities under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The writ petition was filed without allowing the primary, appellate or revisional authorities to examine the matter. It was held that Article 226 is not meant to obstruct the regular statutory machinery, and the Court would ordinarily interfere only at the last resort where there is an apparent error on the face of the record or lack of jurisdiction. No such circumstance was found.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed.

---