Alternate statutory remedy bars writ jurisdiction where tax interpretation issues can be pursued in appeal.

Availability of an efficacious statutory appeal ordinarily bars writ jurisdiction under Article 226, except in recognised exceptional cases such as violation of fundamental rights, breach of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or challenge to vires. Because the challenge concerned only an alleged error in the Tribunal's interpretation of provisions governing computation and rate of tax, the error could be effectively raised in an appeal under section 260A. No extraordinary circumstance was shown to justify writ interference, so the writ petition was held not maintainable and was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the writ petition challenging the ITAT Special Bench order was maintainable in view of the alternate statutory remedy under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Issue (i): Whether the writ petition challenging the ITAT Special Bench order was maintainable in view of the alternate statutory remedy under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis: The availability of an efficacious statutory appeal ordinarily bars recourse to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, save in recognised exceptional situations such as violation of fundamental rights, breach of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or challenge to vires. The challenge raised only an alleged error in the Tribunal's interpretation of the provisions governing computation and rate of tax, and such an error could be effectively urged in an appeal under section 260A. No extraordinary circumstance justifying interference in writ jurisdiction was shown.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed.

---