Statutory appellate remedy bars writ jurisdiction where appeal under Section 35G is available

Writ petitions challenging Tribunal orders were held not maintainable because a specific statutory appellate remedy lay under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Court accepted the preliminary objection that writ jurisdiction should not be used to bypass the alternate remedy, and directed the petitioner to pursue the appellate route instead. The papers were permitted to be taken back and presented as Civil Miscellaneous Appeals.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions challenging orders of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal were maintainable in view of the statutory appellate remedy under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis: The objection to maintainability was accepted after considering Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the respondents' preliminary objection that the proper course was a statutory appeal rather than writ jurisdiction. The petitioner was permitted to take back the papers and present the matters as Civil Miscellaneous Appeals.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were held to be not maintainable and the objection was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the Tribunal's orders did not proceed in writ jurisdiction, and the petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a specific statutory appeal lies under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, writ jurisdiction should not be invoked to bypass that remedy.

---