Alternative statutory remedy bars writ interference in VAT assessment challenges absent exceptional grounds.

A writ petition challenging an assessment order and a rectification rejection under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act was not entertainable where statutory appeals were available and had not been pursued in time. The High Court noted that writ jurisdiction in tax matters is confined to exceptional cases, including violation of fundamental rights, patent lack of jurisdiction, or gross breach of natural justice. As none of those exceptions was shown, the availability of an alternative appellate remedy strongly weighed against entertaining the petition, and the petition was liable to be dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the assessment order and the order rejecting rectification was entertainable despite the availability of statutory appeals under the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002.

Analysis: The impugned assessment order and the rectification order were both amenable to the appellate hierarchy created by the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002. The petitioner had not pursued the statutory remedy within time and offered no sufficient explanation for bypassing it. In matters arising under taxing statutes, writ interference is confined to exceptional cases, such as violation of fundamental rights, patent absence of jurisdiction, or gross breach of natural justice. None of those exceptions was shown to exist. The existence of an alternative remedy did not oust writ jurisdiction, but it strongly told against its exercise in the present case.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertainable and was liable to be dismissed.

---