Alternative remedy barred writ challenge where sales tax dispute involved disputed facts and an available statutory appeal.

Writ jurisdiction was declined because the taxing statute provided a complete appellate remedy that was functioning, and the dispute turned on disputed facts concerning stock transfers, consignment documents and alleged suppression. Where an effective statutory appeal exists, the rule of alternative remedy ordinarily bars a writ petition from bypassing that mechanism, particularly when factual examination is required. The writ petitions were therefore not maintainable and were dismissed, leaving the petitioner to pursue the statutory appellate forum.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions challenging the sales tax appellate tribunal order were maintainable in view of the statutory appellate remedy available under the taxing statute.

Analysis: The assessment dispute arose under the sales tax regime and involved disputed questions of fact regarding stock transfers, consignment documents, and alleged suppression. The petitioner had a statutory appeal available before the Central Sales Tax Appellate Authority, which was functioning. The rule of alternative remedy applies with full force where the statute provides a complete machinery for redressal, and writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not to be invoked to bypass that mechanism, especially when adjudication would require examination of factual materials.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable and were dismissed, leaving the petitioner to pursue the statutory appellate remedy.

---