Alternate statutory remedy in tax disputes bars writ interference absent exceptional grounds; petitioner must pursue appeal and delay condonation.

In fiscal matters, the rule of alternate remedy applies with greater rigour, and writ interference is ordinarily declined where an effective statutory appeal exists. The Madras High Court noted that the impugned reassessment-related order under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax regime was appealable under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. It also observed that the appellate authority could consider a request for condonation of delay, and no exceptional circumstance justified bypassing the statutory forum. The writ petition was therefore not entertained, and the petitioner was relegated to the appellate remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained despite the availability of an effective statutory appeal under the tax enactment.

Analysis: The dispute arose from a reassessment related order under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax regime, and the petitioner sought interference in writ jurisdiction on the ground that another opportunity should be given to produce accounts and records. The Court applied the rule of alternate remedy with greater rigour in fiscal matters and noted that a statutory appeal was available under Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. It also noted that the appellate authority could consider an application for condonation of delay and that the matter had not shown any exceptional ground warranting bypass of the statutory forum. The Court therefore declined to examine the merits of the impugned order in writ proceedings.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.

---