Alternative statutory remedy bars writ interference, while recovery stays pending disposal of revision proceedings.

The High Court declined to interfere with the Tribunal's refusal to entertain the challenge, since an efficacious statutory appeal remedy was available and no clarification was obtained to preserve exclusion of time spent before the Tribunal. The assessee instead pursued rectification, revision, and other statutory proceedings, which supported the Tribunal's view that the original petition was not maintainable. At the same time, because the revision before the Joint Commissioner was still pending, the Court protected the assessee by directing that recovery under the demand would remain stayed until disposal of that revision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court should interfere with the Tribunal's order refusing to entertain the original petition on the ground that an alternative statutory remedy by way of appeal was available.

Analysis: The Tribunal had declined to entertain the challenge as the assessee had an efficacious alternative remedy. The assessee did not obtain any clarification or direction for exclusion of the time spent before the Tribunal so as to preserve the right of appeal. Instead, the assessee pursued rectification, revision, and further proceedings under the statutory framework. In these circumstances, the High Court found no justification to interfere with the Tribunal's view. At the same time, since the revision before the Joint Commissioner was still pending, the Court protected the assessee by directing that recovery pursuant to the demand would remain stayed till disposal of the revision.

Conclusion: The challenge to the Tribunal's order was rejected and the writ petition was dismissed.

---