Alternative statutory remedy bars writ challenge to anti-dumping duty notification; petitioner must pursue Tribunal appeal.

A writ challenge to an anti-dumping duty notification was not entertained because the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 provides a statutory appeal to the Tribunal. The court treated the alternative appellate remedy as an effective bar to writ jurisdiction and rejected heavy pendency before the Tribunal as sufficient ground to bypass that remedy. It noted that the petitioner could instead seek expeditious disposal from the Tribunal after filing an appeal. The writ petition was therefore dismissed as not maintainable, leaving the petitioner to pursue the statutory appellate process.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the anti-dumping duty notification was maintainable in view of the statutory appellate remedy before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.

Analysis: The order records that the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 provides an appeal to the Tribunal against the impugned notification. The plea that there was heavy pendency before the Tribunal was not accepted as sufficient justification to bypass the statutory remedy. The Court observed that the petitioner could seek expeditious disposal from the Tribunal upon filing an appeal.

Conclusion: The writ petition was held not maintainable on the ground of alternative statutory remedy and was dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the notification was not entertained in writ jurisdiction, and the petitioner was left to pursue the appellate remedy under the statute.

---