Alternative statutory remedy barred writ challenge to customs appeal delay condonation refusal, absent jurisdictional or natural justice defects.

A writ petition challenging the Tribunal's refusal to condone delay in a customs appeal is not maintainable where an effective statutory appeal is available and no recognised exception to the alternative-remedy rule is established. Writ jurisdiction may be invoked exceptionally for lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice or a challenge to vires, but none applied. The petitioner had pursued separate writ proceedings concerning release and classification rather than filing the statutory appeal within time, and the explanation for delay did not establish sufficient cause. The Tribunal's factual decision on condonation disclosed no violation of fundamental rights or natural justice, leaving no basis for interference.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition challenging the Tribunal's refusal to condone delay in filing a customs appeal was maintainable despite the statutory appellate remedy, and whether interference with that refusal was warranted.

Analysis: A statutory appeal against the Tribunal's order was available under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962. Writ jurisdiction despite an alternative remedy is exceptional, including cases of lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, or challenge to vires. None of those exceptions was established. The petitioner consciously pursued separate writ proceedings concerning release and classification of the imported goods rather than filing the statutory appeal within time. The explanation for the delayed appeal did not constitute sufficient cause, and condonation of delay was a factual matter in which the Tribunal's decision disclosed no breach of fundamental rights or natural justice.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable and no ground existed to interfere with the Tribunal's refusal to condone delay; the issue was decided against the assessee.

---