Writ interference in reassessment proceedings is premature where the sales tax statute provides full statutory remedies.

A writ challenge to initiation of reassessment under sales tax law was treated as premature because the statute provided a complete machinery for jurisdictional objections, reassessment, appeal and further remedies. The Court held that where the taxing authority had recorded material indicating escaped sales or purchases and the petitioner could contest jurisdiction before that authority, Article 226 should not be used to bypass the statutory process. Writ interference at the stage of initiation or pending assessment was therefore unwarranted, and the challenge to reassessment failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging initiation of reassessment proceedings and the order upholding jurisdiction was premature in view of the statutory scheme under the sales tax law.

Analysis: The petitioner had already been given an opportunity to contest jurisdiction before the taxing authority pursuant to the earlier order, which specifically permitted reassessment proceedings to continue if jurisdiction was found to exist. The authority recorded satisfaction on the basis of material that sales or purchases within Madhya Pradesh had escaped assessment, and the Court declined to reappreciate that material in writ jurisdiction. The statutory framework under the Act provided a complete machinery for hearing, reassessment, appeal, second appeal, and reference, and the Court applied the settled principle that where a statute creates rights and liabilities and provides a special remedy, that remedy must ordinarily be pursued. Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was held not to be a means to short-circuit the assessment process or bypass available appellate remedies.

Conclusion: The writ petition was held to be premature and not maintainable at that stage, and the challenge to the reassessment proceedings failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing statute provides a complete hierarchy of remedies against reassessment, writ interference is ordinarily unwarranted at the stage of initiation or pending assessment, especially when jurisdictional objections can be raised before the statutory authority.

---