https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205569 In a tax valuation dispute, the High Court held that writ jurisdiction should not be invoked where the statute provides a specific appellate remedy, particularly on questions of value and rate of duty, and the writ petition was therefore not maintainable. The Court also held that the adjudicating authority did not travel beyond the show cause notices, since the notices alleged under-valuation and suppression and the valuation rules were already in issue. On limitation, the Court accepted the concurrent finding of suppression, upheld invocation of the extended period, and rejected the challenge to the demand. en-us Fri, 01 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Sep 2011 14:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205569 In a tax valuation dispute, the High Court held that writ jurisdiction should not be invoked where the statute provides a specific appellate remedy, particularly on questions of value and rate of duty, and the writ petition was therefore not maintainable. The Court also held that the adjudicating authority did not travel beyond the show cause notices, since the notices alleged under-valuation and suppression and the valuation rules were already in issue. On limitation, the Court accepted the concurrent finding of suppression, upheld invocation of the extended period, and rejected the challenge to the demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205569