Statutory appeal bars writ review where fiscal rule interpretation and vires challenge are premature before the Tribunal.

An efficacious statutory appeal under the Central Excise Act barred writ intervention where the Commissioner's duty and penalty order was appealable to the Tribunal. The High Court treated interpretation of Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and 2004 as a for the appellate forum, and held that the writ court should not be used to bypass that remedy. The constitutional challenge to the rule was also premature because the vires issue would arise only if the petitioner's construction failed before the Tribunal. The petitioner was therefore required to pursue the statutory appeal first, leaving the vires challenge open for later if necessary.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the availability of an appellate remedy under the Central Excise Act, and whether the constitutional validity of Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 and Rule 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 could be examined at that stage.

Analysis: The Commissioner's order determining duty and imposing penalty was appealable to the Tribunal under the Central Excise Act. Questions concerning the interpretation of the rule under which liability had been fastened were held to be matters for the appellate forum. The Court declined to treat the writ remedy as available merely because an earlier tribunal decision existed, noting that the interpretation urged in the writ petition had not been considered there. The challenge to vires was held to be premature because the constitutional issue would arise only if the petitioner's construction of the rule failed before the Tribunal. The existence of an effective statutory appeal therefore excluded writ intervention at that stage.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and the constitutional challenge was not entertained at this stage.

Final Conclusion: The Court required the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal before the Tribunal and left the vires challenge open to be raised, if necessary, after that remedy was pursued.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, the writ court will not ordinarily examine the interpretation or vires of a fiscal rule at a premature stage, especially when the constitutional challenge depends on the failure of the petitioner's construction before the appellate authority.

---