https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360366 The High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking to quash the order-in-original dated 9/12.2.2018, which imposed differential duty, interest, and penalty on the petitioner. Emphasizing the availability of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal, the court held that the petitioner should exhaust such remedies before resorting to writ jurisdiction. Citing legal precedents, the court underscored the importance of self-imposed limitation on the High Court's discretion in entertaining writ petitions. Consequently, the court directed the petitioner to pursue the alternative remedy of appeal against the impugned order, highlighting the need to follow established legal procedures. en-us Thu, 10 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 May 2018 14:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360366 The High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking to quash the order-in-original dated 9/12.2.2018, which imposed differential duty, interest, and penalty on the petitioner. Emphasizing the availability of an alternative statutory remedy of appeal, the court held that the petitioner should exhaust such remedies before resorting to writ jurisdiction. Citing legal precedents, the court underscored the importance of self-imposed limitation on the High Court's discretion in entertaining writ petitions. Consequently, the court directed the petitioner to pursue the alternative remedy of appeal against the impugned order, highlighting the need to follow established legal procedures. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 10 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360366