https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308361 The High Court declined to exercise Article 226 jurisdiction because the impugned order was amenable to statutory appeal under Section 35 of the Finance Act, 1994. Since an alternate remedy existed, the Court refused to entertain the writ petition and dismissed it on that ground, while preserving the petitioner's liberty to pursue the remedy available under the statutory appeal mechanism. en-us Fri, 17 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Jun 2023 21:42:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308361 The High Court declined to exercise Article 226 jurisdiction because the impugned order was amenable to statutory appeal under Section 35 of the Finance Act, 1994. Since an alternate remedy existed, the Court refused to entertain the writ petition and dismissed it on that ground, while preserving the petitioner's liberty to pursue the remedy available under the statutory appeal mechanism. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 17 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308361