Statutory appellate remedy prevails over writ intervention, with limited recovery protection granted to enable an appeal.

A writ petition challenging a conditional stay order was not entertained on merits because the petitioner had an available statutory appellate remedy before the Central Sales Tax Appellate Authority. The Court held that the petitioner should first pursue that appellate course rather than seek writ intervention against the assessment-related recovery process. Given the expiring time for deposit, the Court granted limited interim protection by directing the respondents not to recover the tax amount for 15 days, enabling the petitioner to file an appeal and a stay application before the appellate authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained in view of the statutory appellate remedy, and whether temporary protection against recovery should be granted to enable the petitioner to approach the appellate authority.

Analysis: The petition challenged the Tax Board's conditional stay order without this Court entering into the merits of the assessment. The Court held that the petitioner should pursue the statutory appellate remedy before the Central Sales Tax Appellate Authority. In the peculiar facts, and because the period granted by the Tax Board for deposit was expiring, the Court directed the respondents not to recover the tax amount for 15 days so that the petitioner could file an appeal and stay application before the appellate authority.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained on merits, the petitioner was relegated to the appellate remedy, and limited interim protection against recovery was granted for 15 days.

---