Writ jurisdiction barred where the statutory VAT appeal was time-barred; rectification remedy remained available in law

Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 will not ordinarily be used to challenge a VAT assessment order when the statutory appeal under the Tamil Nadu VAT Act was not filed within the maximum limitation period, including the condonable delay period. Because the assessee did not exhaust the prescribed appellate remedy in time, the Court declined to examine the merits of the assessment and held the writ petition not maintainable. The Court further noted that the assessee was at liberty to seek rectification, if otherwise permissible in law, under the Act's rectification provision.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India could be entertained against a VAT assessment order when the statutory appeal under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was not filed within the maximum period of limitation, and whether liberty could be reserved to seek rectification under Section 84 of the said Act.

Analysis: The assessment order was challenged after expiry of the statutory period available for appeal, including the further period within which delay could be condoned by the appellate authority. In view of the settled principle that writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily be invoked to bypass an unexhausted and time-barred statutory remedy, the Court declined to examine the merits of the assessment. The Court also clarified that the petitioner was not precluded from pursuing rectification, if otherwise permissible in law, under the rectification provision of the Act.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed. The petitioner was left at liberty to seek rectification in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Writ jurisdiction will not ordinarily be entertained to assail a statutory order when the prescribed appellate remedy was not availed within the maximum period of limitation.

---