TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the availability of an alternative statutory appeal, coupled with a pre-deposit requirement, barred the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Analysis: The availability of an appellate remedy does not by itself oust the constitutional jurisdiction under Article 226. The Court may decline interference as a matter of discretion, but maintainability is not extinguished merely because a statute provides an appeal. The burden of depositing the disputed tax as a condition precedent to hearing may bear on whether the alternative remedy is adequate or efficacious, and the Court must examine the facts to decide whether writ jurisdiction should be exercised. The statutory finality clause cannot take away constitutional power of judicial review.
Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable and the dismissal in limine on the ground of availability of appeal could not be sustained.
Final Conclusion: The impugned judgment was set aside and the writ petition was remanded for fresh decision, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
Ratio Decidendi: Availability of an alternative statutory remedy, even with a pre-deposit condition, does not bar recourse to Article 226, though it may be a relevant factor in the Court's discretionary decision whether to entertain the writ.
TaxTMI 
