Alternative statutory remedy bars writ challenge to detention of goods under sales tax check-post provisions

Writ petitions challenging detention of goods under the sales tax check-post provisions were held not maintainable because an effective statutory appeal was available. The scheme under section 14-B authorised detention where the officer suspected absence of genuine documents or an attempt to evade tax, while section 20 provided a complete appellate mechanism against orders under the Act. Although article 226 confers wide jurisdiction, the High Court ordinarily refuses writ relief in revenue matters when an alternative remedy exists. As no exceptional circumstances were shown to justify bypassing that remedy, the petitions were liable to be dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions challenging detention of goods under the sales tax check-post provisions were maintainable in view of the statutory remedy of appeal.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under section 14-B of the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 empowered the check-post officer to detain goods where there was reason to suspect absence of proper and genuine documents or an attempt to evade tax, and section 20 provided a complete appellate mechanism against orders passed under the Act. The extraordinary jurisdiction under article 226 is wide, but the High Court ordinarily declines to entertain a writ petition where an effective alternative remedy exists, particularly in revenue matters. The Court held that no exceptional circumstances were shown to justify bypassing the statutory appellate remedy.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable and were liable to be dismissed for availability of an effective alternative remedy of appeal.

---