Writ jurisdiction against customs duty levy was refused where no validity challenge was raised and statutory remedy existed.

A writ challenge to levy of additional customs duty under the Customs Tariff Act was found not maintainable where the petitioner did not question the validity of the statutory provision and an effective statutory remedy was available. The Court treated the issue as one of statutory interpretation and emphasised that, in the absence of any challenge to the provision itself, invocation of writ jurisdiction was unwarranted. The appeal was dismissed because the appellant ought to have pursued the available statutory remedy instead of approaching the writ court.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition challenging levy of additional duty of customs was maintainable when no challenge was made to the validity of the statutory provision and an alternative statutory remedy was available.

Analysis: The challenge related to levy of additional duty of customs under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Court noted that the question turned on statutory interpretation and that there was no challenge to the validity of the provision. In that situation, the availability of an effective statutory remedy weighed against invocation of writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and the appeal was dismissed on the ground that the appellant should have pursued the statutory remedy.

---