Writ jurisdiction and tax exemption disputes over SEZ authorised operations must yield to the statutory appellate remedy.

A writ challenge to an assessment order was held inappropriate where the tax exemption claim turned on disputed facts about the SEZ co-developer's authorised operations, the approved services, and whether the residential development formed part of those operations. Because effective appellate remedies were available and the exemption issue required factual scrutiny, the writ court should not bypass the statutory appeal process. The petition was therefore dismissed, leaving the assessee to pursue the appellate remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the assessment order was maintainable in view of the statutory appellate remedy and the need to examine disputed factual questions concerning the SEZ co-developer's authorised operations and the claimed tax exemption.

Analysis: The challenge to the assessment could not be examined in writ jurisdiction because the correctness of the exemption claim depended on factual scrutiny of the co-developer's project, the approved services, and whether the residential development formed part of authorised operations in the SEZ. The availability of an effective appeal, coupled with the presence of complicated disputed facts, made the writ remedy inappropriate.

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

Ratio Decidendi: Where adjudication of tax exemption depends on disputed questions of fact, the writ court should not bypass the statutory appellate remedy.

---