Efficacious statutory appeal bars writ review where the VAT dispute must first be taken to the Tribunal.

An efficacious statutory second appeal under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act was available against the appellate order, so writ jurisdiction was not ordinarily invoked. The Court held that the petitioners should be relegated to the Tribunal, and it did not examine the merits of the assessment and appellate challenges. The question of pre-deposit was left open to be decided in accordance with law if raised before the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained when a statutory second appeal remedy was available under the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 1969.

Analysis: The petition challenged assessment and appellate orders under the sales tax regime, but the statutory scheme provided a second appeal to the Tribunal against an order passed in appeal by the Assistant Commissioner. In view of that efficacious alternative remedy, the Court found that the petitioners should be relegated to the Tribunal. The merits of the controversy were not examined, and the question of pre-deposit was left open to be decided in accordance with law if raised before the Tribunal.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained and the petitioners were directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not invoked to decide the merits of the dispute.

---