Statutory appellate remedy bars writ jurisdiction when an appeal and stay application are already pending before the Tribunal.

Writ jurisdiction will ordinarily not be exercised to bypass an efficacious statutory appellate remedy already invoked and pending before a competent forum. Because the petitioner had filed an appeal and a stay application before the Tribunal, which was functional and seized of the dispute, no exceptional circumstance justified interference under writ powers. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable and was dismissed, with the petitioner left to pursue the pending appellate proceedings and the stay application expected to be decided expeditiously.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was maintainable when the petitioner had already invoked the statutory appellate remedy before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and a stay application was pending.

Analysis: The petitioner had already filed an appeal and a stay application before the Tribunal. The Tribunal was in seisin of the dispute and was stated to be functional. In these circumstances, bypassing the statutory forum and invoking writ jurisdiction was not warranted. No exceptional ground was made out to justify interference, and the pendency of proceedings before a competent statutory forum weighed against entertaining the writ petition.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed in view of the available statutory appellate remedy.

Final Conclusion: The petitioner was relegated to the pending proceedings before the Tribunal, with an expectation that the stay application would be decided expeditiously.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious statutory appellate remedy is already invoked and is pending before a competent forum, writ jurisdiction will ordinarily not be exercised to bypass that remedy absent exceptional circumstances.

---