Alternative statutory remedy bars writ challenge to VAT assessment unless exceptional grounds justify bypassing the appellate forum.

A writ petition challenging an assessment order under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 was held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal was available under Section 55. The settled rule under Article 226 is that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not invoked where an alternative appellate remedy exists, unless exceptional grounds such as violation of natural justice or lack of jurisdiction are shown. As the dispute involved factual issues capable of examination in appeal and no sufficient exceptional basis was demonstrated, the writ petition was rejected in favour of the statutory forum.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging an assessment order under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008 was maintainable in view of the statutory appellate remedy under Section 55 of that Act.

Analysis: The assessment order was assailed on the merits, but the petitioner had an available appeal under Section 55 of the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008. The Court applied the settled rule that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is ordinarily not exercised when an efficacious statutory remedy exists, save in exceptional situations such as violation of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or similar exceptional grounds. Since the grievance turned on factual questions that could be examined in appeal and no sufficient ground was shown to bypass the statutory forum, the writ petition was not entertained.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable in the face of an efficacious alternative appellate remedy and was rightly rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily be invoked to challenge an assessment order unless exceptional grounds justify departure from the rule of alternative remedy.

---