Writ jurisdiction and disputed facts: assessment challenge left to the statutory appeal remedy.

A writ challenge to assessment and penalty-related orders was not entertained where the dispute raised disputed questions of fact and an efficacious statutory appeal was available. The court noted that the assessment materials had been considered and that no violation of natural justice was shown. On that basis, it declined to examine the merits in writ jurisdiction and left the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy under the statute.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the assessment and penalty-related orders was maintainable in the presence of disputed questions of fact and an efficacious statutory appeal remedy.

Analysis: The order recorded that the assessment materials had been considered and that the grievance did not establish a violation of natural justice. Since the controversy involved disputed questions of fact, the Court declined to adjudicate the merits in writ jurisdiction and left the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal remedy.

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

---