Alternative statutory remedy bars writ review where input tax credit disputes raise mixed questions of fact and law.

Where an effective statutory appeal is available under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 will ordinarily not be entertained, particularly when the dispute involves mixed questions of fact and law. The challenge to the assessment order required examination of whether input tax credit was correctly availed on the items concerned, a matter better determined by the statutory appellate authorities. The writ petition was therefore held not maintainable and dismissed, leaving the petitioner to pursue the alternative appellate remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the assessment order was maintainable in view of the alternate statutory remedy of appeal under the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003.

Analysis: An appeal under Section 62 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 was available against the assessment order passed under Section 39(2). The challenge involved questions whether input tax credit was rightly availed on the items in question, which required determination of mixed questions of fact and law by the statutory authorities under the Act. In such circumstances, the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was not to be exercised when an effective alternate remedy existed.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed, leaving the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an effective statutory appeal is available and the dispute turns on mixed questions of fact and law, the writ jurisdiction will ordinarily not be entertained.

---