Statutory appellate remedy barred writ review of a VAT demand where dealer status and taxability involved disputed facts.

A writ challenge to a VAT demand was declined because the TNVAT Act provided a layered statutory appellate remedy, including appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner and further appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. The dispute involved mixed questions of fact and law on dealer status and taxability, which the Court treated as matters better examined by the appellate forum acting as the proper fact-finding authority. Writ jurisdiction was therefore not used as a substitute for the statutory appeal mechanism, and the petitioner was directed to pursue the available appellate remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the VAT demand could be entertained in view of the statutory appellate remedies available under the TNVAT Act.

Analysis: The challenge raised questions of fact and law concerning the applicability of the dealer definition and the taxability of the transactions. The statutory scheme provided a layered remedy by way of appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, further appeal to the Appellate Tribunal, and subsequent recourse as permitted by the Act. In such circumstances, the Court held that disputed factual issues are better examined by the appellate forum, which is the appropriate fact-finding authority, and that writ jurisdiction should not be invoked as a substitute for the statutory appellate mechanism.

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

---