Alternate statutory remedy does not always bar writ review in tax disputes where prolonged interim protection and hardship justify merits consideration.

In fiscal matters, the availability of a statutory appellate remedy does not automatically bar writ intervention where exceptional circumstances exist, including prolonged pendency under interim protection and the need to avoid undue hardship from sending the assessee back to the appellate forum. Stock-difference objections were treated as factual, so the assessee was left to pursue the statutory appeal on that limited issue. For the disputes on inter-State sales treated as local sales and reversal of input tax credit, reconsideration was made conditional on further representation, production of contemporaneous records, departmental verification, and partial payment of the disputed tax. The assessing authority's verification powers under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act were also noted.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ appeal challenging the assessment order could be entertained notwithstanding availability of the statutory appellate remedy under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006; (ii) what relief should be granted in respect of the assessment issues relating to stock difference, inter-State sales treated as local sales, and reversal of input tax credit.

Issue (i): Whether the writ appeal challenging the assessment order could be entertained notwithstanding availability of the statutory appellate remedy under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.

Analysis: Ordinarily, an assessee is expected to pursue the statutory appellate remedy in fiscal matters. That rule admits exceptions, including cases involving lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, perversity, and similar exceptional situations. The writ petition had remained pending for several years with an interim stay in force, and the revenue had also contested the matter on merits. In those circumstances, relegating the assessee to the appellate forum after such prolonged pendency was considered harsh, and the matter was taken up on merits.

Conclusion: The writ appeal was entertainable despite the alternate remedy.

Issue (ii): What relief should be granted in respect of the assessment issues relating to stock difference, inter-State sales treated as local sales, and reversal of input tax credit.

Analysis: The issue relating to stock difference was treated as purely factual, and liberty was granted to pursue the statutory appeal on that limited aspect. For the remaining two issues, the Court noted that the genuineness of the transactions and movement of goods could be examined through further representation, production of contemporaneous records, and departmental verification. The assessee was also directed to pay a percentage of the disputed tax before approaching the assessing authority. Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 was specifically referred to as enabling the assessing authority to summon persons or documents for verification.

Conclusion: Limited relief was granted by permitting an appeal on the stock-difference issue and by allowing the assessee to seek reconsideration of the remaining issues on compliance with the conditions imposed.

Final Conclusion: The assessment was not set aside in full, but the assessee obtained partial relief through a conditional opportunity to pursue appellate and administrative remedies on the disputed tax components.

Ratio Decidendi: In fiscal matters, the existence of an alternate statutory remedy does not bar writ intervention where exceptional circumstances exist, including prolonged pendency of the writ and the need to avoid hardship from relegating the assessee after years of interim protection; factual assessment disputes may then be handled through limited remand-like directions and conditional reconsideration.

---