Alternative statutory remedy bars writ interference where assessment disputes turn on factual issues and notice was given.

Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was found inappropriate where the assessment and rectification disputes under the KVAT Act turned on disputed factual questions, including estimation, document consideration, and reliance on audit material, which were matters for the statutory appellate forums. The Court noted that notice had been issued and the assessee had participated, so the natural justice challenge did not justify bypassing alternative remedies. Filing a rectification application did not bar a statutory appeal, and in the absence of exceptional grounds such as lack of notice or a serious vires challenge, the writ petitions were not maintainable and were dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions challenging the assessment order and the rectification rejection were maintainable in view of the statutory appellate and revisionary remedies under the KVAT Act, and whether the alleged breach of natural justice justified interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The impugned assessment had been preceded by notice and participation by the assessee, and the grievance raised before the Court turned on disputed factual matters such as the manner of estimation, consideration of documents, reliance on audit material, and alleged errors in the assessment. Such matters required examination by the appellate authorities constituted under the KVAT Act, which are the proper fact-finding forums. The Court held that filing a rectification application did not bar the statutory appeal, and that the existence of an effective alternative remedy, coupled with the absence of any exceptional ground such as lack of notice or a serious challenge to vires, made recourse to writ jurisdiction inappropriate.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable and were dismissed in favour of the Revenue.

---