Writ jurisdiction and alternative remedies: disputed tax classification requiring factual inquiry must be pursued through statutory appeal and revision.

Where an adequate statutory appeal and revision are available under the Bihar Finance Act, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be used to bypass those remedies. The dispute over whether the sales were inter-State or intra-State depended on contractual terms and surrounding facts, requiring factual inquiry and evidence that could not properly be undertaken in writ proceedings. The court therefore held that the writ petition was not maintainable and that the challenge to the assessment orders could not be entertained, leaving the petitioners to pursue the statutory appellate and revisional remedies.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the availability of statutory appeal and revision under the Bihar Finance Act, and whether disputed questions as to the nature of the sales could be examined in writ jurisdiction.

Analysis: The impugned assessments were challengeable under section 45 of the Bihar Finance Act, and revision under section 46(4) was also invoked, showing the existence of statutory remedies. The controversy whether the sales were inter-State or intra-State depended on contractual terms and surrounding facts, requiring factual inquiry and appreciation of evidence, which was not appropriate for determination under article 226. The availability of an adequate and efficacious alternative remedy weighed against exercise of writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and the challenge to the assessment orders could not be entertained in writ jurisdiction.

Final Conclusion: The petitioners were left to pursue the available appellate and revisional remedies under the statute, and the writ proceeding was brought to an end without adjudication on the merits of the tax dispute.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an adequate and efficacious statutory remedy exists, and the dispute turns on contested facts requiring evidence, writ jurisdiction should not be invoked to bypass the statutory appellate or revisional process.

---