Alternate statutory remedy bars writ review where disputed facts and revision proceedings remain the proper forum for challenge.

Writ jurisdiction was not entertained against a revisional order because the petitioner had an effective statutory appellate remedy and the dispute involved contested factual issues arising from survey, assessment, revision, and demand proceedings. The court treated the availability of an appeal as the proper course for challenging the revisional action and declined to examine the merits in writ proceedings. The petition was therefore disposed of, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the revisional order under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was maintainable in view of the statutory appellate remedy and the disputed factual matrix.

Analysis: The impugned revisional order was challenged after the petitioner had an alternative remedy before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 253(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The matter also involved disputed questions arising from the survey, the scrutiny assessment, the subsequent revisional proceedings, and the later assessment and demand notices. In these circumstances, the writ jurisdiction was not invoked to examine the merits of the revisional action.

Outcome: The writ petition was not entertained and was disposed of with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal remedy.

---