Statutory appeal limitation bars writ relief when the tax appellate remedy is not pursued within the prescribed maximum period.

Where a tax statute prescribes a maximum period for filing an appeal, Article 226 writ jurisdiction cannot be used to bypass that legislative limit. The Madras HC noted that the petitioner had not exhausted the statutory remedy under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 within the permissible time, and rejected the argument that a time-barred appeal filed later could be treated differently from no appeal at all. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable, and the tax assessment order remained undisturbed because the statutory appellate scheme had been allowed to lapse.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the tax assessment order was maintainable when the petitioner had not exhausted the statutory appeal remedy within the maximum period of limitation prescribed under the tax statute.

Analysis: The statutory scheme provided an appeal under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, with a limited period for filing and a further condonable period up to the maximum prescribed limit. The petitioner did not pursue that remedy within time and instead invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The governing principle is that the High Court should not be asked to bypass the legislative restriction on appeal by entertaining a writ petition against an order that has attained finality after expiry of the statutory limitation. The inability to distinguish between a time-barred appeal that was filed and no appeal at all was rejected, since the controlling factor is the lapse of the maximum statutory period.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed because the petitioner could not circumvent the expired statutory appellate remedy by invoking writ jurisdiction.

Final Conclusion: The tax assessment order was left undisturbed, and the petitioner was denied writ relief for failure to pursue the statutory appeal within the permissible time.

Ratio Decidendi: When a statute prescribes a maximum period for appeal against a tax order, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be used to defeat that limitation and bypass the legislative appellate scheme.

---