Statutory appeal remedy bars writ challenge when limitation expired after earlier liberty to appeal.

A writ challenge to a tax assessment order is not maintainable where the petitioner had already been granted liberty to pursue the statutory appeal within the prescribed time and failed to do so. The Court treated limitation as running from the earlier order, noted that the appeal was not filed within the extended period, and held that writ jurisdiction cannot be used to bypass an available appellate remedy after its expiry. The challenge therefore failed because the assessee did not avail the effective statutory remedy within time.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the tax order was maintainable after the petitioner had earlier been granted liberty to avail the statutory appeal within limitation and failed to do so.

Analysis: A prior order had specifically directed the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy against the impugned order and had treated limitation as running from that order. The petitioner did not file the appeal within the extended period and approached the Court after a substantial delay. In such circumstances, the writ jurisdiction was not available to bypass the remedy earlier granted and the expiry of limitation under the statutory scheme.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertainable and was rightly dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the assessment order failed because the petitioner had an effective appellate remedy, which was not pursued within time despite earlier liberty granted by the Court.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory appellate remedy has already been expressly granted with limitation to run from a specified date, a subsequent writ petition challenging the same order is not maintainable after the remedy is not availed within that period.

---