Writ jurisdiction cannot secure Income Declaration Scheme tax credit where disputed facts require competent authority scrutiny.

Credit for advance tax and TDS under the Income Declaration Scheme could not be granted directly in writ jurisdiction where the claim turned on disputed facts, document scrutiny, and factual verification under the statutory scheme. The High Court noted that such issues required examination by the competent authority and could not be resolved through a roving enquiry under Article 226. The petitioner was therefore required to pursue the representation before the authority, which was to decide the matter on merits in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition seeking credit of advance tax and tax deducted at source for computation under the Income Declaration Scheme could be granted in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The relief depended upon adjudication of disputed facts and examination of documents and evidence before the competent authority. The claim required application of the statutory scheme and factual verification, which could not be undertaken by the High Court in writ proceedings by way of a roving enquiry. The appropriate course was for the authority to consider the representation and decide the matter on merits in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable for direct grant of the substantive relief sought, and the petitioner was directed to pursue the representation before the competent authority.

---