https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43176 A writ challenge to detention of excisable goods failed where the objections depended on disputed facts about the identity of the liable entity and ownership of the goods. The High Court declined to exercise Article 226 jurisdiction as an original fact-finding forum and held that such factual disputes should first be placed before the detaining authority by representation. The petition was therefore not maintainable on those grounds, with liberty to seek redress before the authority in accordance with law. en-us Mon, 04 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jun 2010 15:47:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43176 A writ challenge to detention of excisable goods failed where the objections depended on disputed facts about the identity of the liable entity and ownership of the goods. The High Court declined to exercise Article 226 jurisdiction as an original fact-finding forum and held that such factual disputes should first be placed before the detaining authority by representation. The petition was therefore not maintainable on those grounds, with liberty to seek redress before the authority in accordance with law. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 04 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43176