https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416139 The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging an Order-In-Original dated June 16, 2021, confirming duty demand, penalties, and confiscation. It held that the penalty amount was not disproportionate, the appellate remedy under Section 35F was not onerous, and factual errors were not within its purview. Emphasizing the statutory appeal route, the court declined jurisdiction under Article 226, citing the need to adhere to the statutory framework. The petitions were dismissed without costs, allowing the petitioners to pursue the appellate remedy under the Central Excise Act. en-us Tue, 14 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Dec 2021 07:49:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416139 The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging an Order-In-Original dated June 16, 2021, confirming duty demand, penalties, and confiscation. It held that the penalty amount was not disproportionate, the appellate remedy under Section 35F was not onerous, and factual errors were not within its purview. Emphasizing the statutory appeal route, the court declined jurisdiction under Article 226, citing the need to adhere to the statutory framework. The petitions were dismissed without costs, allowing the petitioners to pursue the appellate remedy under the Central Excise Act. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 14 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416139