Specific tariff entry prevails for aluminium granules and powder; writ jurisdiction remains open on classification disputes.

Aluminium granules or powder were held to retain the character of aluminium and to fall under the specific taxable entry for aluminium at 4%, rather than the residuary entry at 12.5%, because a residuary provision applies only where no specific entry covers the commodity. The Court also held that the writ petition was maintainable despite an alternative statutory remedy, as the dispute turned on classification and interpretation of the taxing entry. The assessment was interfered with to the extent necessary and remitted for reassessment on the basis of the specific aluminium entry.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether aluminium granules or aluminium powder were classifiable under the specific entry for aluminium at 4% or under the residuary entry at 12.5%; (ii) whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the availability of an alternative statutory remedy.

Issue (i): Whether aluminium granules or aluminium powder were classifiable under the specific entry for aluminium at 4% or under the residuary entry at 12.5%?

Analysis: The determining factor was the nature and use of the commodity. The relevant schedule specifically prescribed a 4% rate for aluminium and allied non-ferrous metals. The material supplied by the petitioner was aluminium granules or powder, and the Court found that its character and use remained aluminium. Where a commodity falls within a specific entry, the Revenue cannot resort to the residuary entry merely because the goods are in powder or granulated form. The residuary entry applies only when no specific entry governs the commodity.

Conclusion: The commodity was covered by the specific entry for aluminium and was liable to tax at 4%, not at 12.5% under the residuary entry.

Issue (ii): Whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the availability of an alternative statutory remedy?

Analysis: The existence of an appellate remedy is a rule of discretion and not an absolute bar to writ jurisdiction. In matters involving the interpretation of the taxing entry and the correctness of the classification adopted by the assessing authority, the Court held that the petition could be entertained. The dispute concerned the legal applicability of the specific entry and not a matter that required relegation to the alternate forum.

Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable notwithstanding the alternative remedy.

Final Conclusion: The assessment was interfered with to the extent necessary to apply the specific rate for aluminium, and the matter was sent back for reassessment on that basis.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods answer the description of a specific taxable entry, the residuary entry cannot be invoked merely because the goods are processed or presented in another form, and writ jurisdiction may be exercised where the dispute turns on classification and interpretation of the taxing entry.

---