Alternate remedy in fiscal matters bars writ interference where statutory appeal remains available and assessment merits are disputed.

Interference under Article 226 was declined because the dispute concerned assessment merits under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 and an efficacious statutory appeal was available. The petitioner had already pursued an earlier appeal, the matter had been remitted, and the respondent thereafter issued notice with purchase invoice details and granted personal hearing. As no objections were filed, the grievance was treated as one fit for adjudication in the appellate forum rather than writ jurisdiction. The writ petition was not entertained, and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appeal remedy, leaving the substantive issues open there.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained in view of the statutory appellate remedy under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, and whether the impugned assessment order warranted interference in writ jurisdiction.

Analysis: The petitioner had already availed the statutory appeal earlier and the matter had been remitted with directions. In the present round, the respondent furnished the purchase invoice details by notice with enclosures and granted personal hearing. The petitioner did not file objections. The grievance, at its highest, concerned the manner in which the assessment exercise was carried out and thus raised matters of merit suitable for appeal. In fiscal matters, the rule of alternate remedy applies with greater rigour, and writ interference is ordinarily declined when the statute provides an efficacious appellate remedy.

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

Final Conclusion: Interference under Article 226 was declined because the dispute was held to be one for adjudication in the statutory appellate forum, leaving all substantive questions open there.

Ratio Decidendi: In fiscal matters, where an effective statutory appeal is available, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked and the aggrieved party must exhaust the alternate remedy.

---