Statutory appellate remedy bars writ jurisdiction where the tax appeal framework can address factual and legal objections.

Writ petitions challenging assessment orders under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act were held not maintainable where the Act provides a complete appellate and revisional framework. Article 226 should not be used routinely to bypass an efficacious statutory remedy, and even alleged jurisdictional error or incorrect application of an amended provision does not, by itself, justify skipping the appellate hierarchy. The appellate authorities are competent to examine factual and legal objections on the original records, so the petitioners were required to pursue the statutory appeal process first.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions were maintainable without exhausting the statutory appellate remedy under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under Sections 51, 58, 59 and 60 of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 provides a complete appellate and revisional framework for assessees to challenge assessment orders. The extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not to be invoked as a matter of routine where an efficacious alternative remedy exists. The existence of an alleged jurisdictional error or erroneous application of an amended provision does not by itself justify bypassing the appellate mechanism, since the appellate authorities are competent to examine both factual and legal objections on the original records.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable at the threshold, and the petitioners were required to pursue the statutory appellate remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: When an effective statutory appellate remedy is available, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be exercised to bypass the appellate forum, and even jurisdictional objections are to be addressed in the statutory hierarchy unless exceptional circumstances are shown.

---