https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43215 The article states that a writ petition challenging disallowance of MODVAT credit, penalty, and withdrawal of facility should not be entertained when an effective statutory appeal is available before CEGAT. It emphasises that disputes involving alleged suppression of facts, entitlement to credit, and extended limitation require detailed factual enquiry, which is unsuitable for Article 226 review. In the absence of exceptional grounds such as lack of jurisdiction or violation of fundamental rights, the Court should decline writ interference and direct the party to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. en-us Fri, 13 Dec 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:49:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43215 The article states that a writ petition challenging disallowance of MODVAT credit, penalty, and withdrawal of facility should not be entertained when an effective statutory appeal is available before CEGAT. It emphasises that disputes involving alleged suppression of facts, entitlement to credit, and extended limitation require detailed factual enquiry, which is unsuitable for Article 226 review. In the absence of exceptional grounds such as lack of jurisdiction or violation of fundamental rights, the Court should decline writ interference and direct the party to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 13 Dec 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43215