Statutory appellate remedy must be exhausted before challenging assessment orders in writ, even for alleged jurisdictional errors.

Where an efficacious statutory appeal is provided under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should ordinarily not be invoked against an assessment order. Allegations of jurisdictional error or erroneous application of an amended tax provision do not, by themselves, justify bypassing the appellate hierarchy, because the appellate authority can examine legal issues, factual disputes, and the original assessment records. The writ petitions were therefore not maintainable in the first instance, and the assessee was required to pursue the statutory appellate remedy before seeking extraordinary relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions challenging the assessment orders were maintainable without exhausting the statutory appellate remedy, even though jurisdictional error and erroneous application of the amended tax provision were alleged.

Analysis: The statutory scheme under the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 provides a complete appellate hierarchy, including appeal to the Appellate Deputy Commissioner, the Appellate Tribunal, and further remedies. Exhaustion of such remedy is the rule, while invocation of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is an exception. The existence of an allegation that the assessing authority applied an amended provision to earlier assessment years does not by itself justify bypassing the appellate forum, because the appellate authority is competent to examine jurisdictional issues, legal errors, and factual disputes on the original records. The writ court should not be converted into the first forum for deciding mixed questions of fact and law when the statute provides an effective mechanism for redressal.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not maintainable in the first instance and the petitioner was required to pursue the statutory appellate remedy.

Final Conclusion: The assessment challenges were left to be pursued before the appellate authority, and the writ court declined to entertain the merits in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked to challenge an assessment order, including on grounds of alleged jurisdictional error, unless exceptional circumstances justify bypassing the statutory remedy.

---