Writ interference in pending classification appeals declined where statutory remedy remained efficacious and refund relief was premature.

Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was declined where a fact-intensive tariff classification dispute was already pending in a statutory appeal. The High Court held that, because an efficacious appellate remedy had been invoked and was still being pursued, interference to bypass the Tribunal was not justified on affidavit material alone. The petitioner's earlier offer to pay the disputed amount before the Tribunal did not make writ intervention appropriate. Consequential refund relief was also rejected as premature until the merits of the appeal were decided, and the matter was left for expeditious determination by the appellate tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ court should interfere with the Tribunal's order and classification dispute when the statutory appeal was pending, and whether consequential refund relief could be granted.

Analysis: The petitioner had itself offered to pay the disputed amount before the Tribunal, which disposed of the stay application on that basis. The classification controversy under the tariff heading was still pending before the Tribunal and turned essentially on facts, which was not appropriate for determination in writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on affidavit material alone. Since an efficacious statutory remedy had been invoked and was still being pursued, interference to bypass that remedy was not justified. Refund relief was also premature while the merits of the appeal remained undecided.

Conclusion: The request to quash the Tribunal's order was declined, the consequential refund claim was not granted, and the writ petition was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The dispute was left to be decided by the appellate tribunal in accordance with law, and the High Court confined itself to declining writ interference while directing expeditious disposal of the pending appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessee has an efficacious statutory appeal pending on a fact-intensive classification dispute, writ jurisdiction will not ordinarily be exercised to bypass that remedy or to grant consequential refund before the appeal is decided.

---