https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348863 An efficacious statutory appeal was already pending before CESTAT, and the memorandum of appeal included a challenge to the same orders questioned in the writ petition. The High Court noted that the Tribunal was the appropriate forum to decide the factual and legal contentions, including the validity and correctness of the impugned orders passed under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with the Hot Re-Rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997. It therefore declined to examine the merits in writ jurisdiction and left the petitioner to pursue all grounds before the appellate forum. en-us Wed, 26 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Oct 2017 06:30:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348863 An efficacious statutory appeal was already pending before CESTAT, and the memorandum of appeal included a challenge to the same orders questioned in the writ petition. The High Court noted that the Tribunal was the appropriate forum to decide the factual and legal contentions, including the validity and correctness of the impugned orders passed under Rule 96ZP(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with the Hot Re-Rolling Steel Mills Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997. It therefore declined to examine the merits in writ jurisdiction and left the petitioner to pursue all grounds before the appellate forum. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 26 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348863