https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44019 A writ petition under Article 226 was treated as not maintainable against a show cause notice issued under the Central Excises and Salt Act because the statute provided an adjudicatory mechanism and appellate remedies. Interference at the notice stage was viewed as improper where the legislature had created a complete statutory process for reply, adjudication, and appeal. The petitioner was therefore directed to pursue the statutory remedy rather than invoke writ jurisdiction at that stage. en-us Wed, 14 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:45:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44019 A writ petition under Article 226 was treated as not maintainable against a show cause notice issued under the Central Excises and Salt Act because the statute provided an adjudicatory mechanism and appellate remedies. Interference at the notice stage was viewed as improper where the legislature had created a complete statutory process for reply, adjudication, and appeal. The petitioner was therefore directed to pursue the statutory remedy rather than invoke writ jurisdiction at that stage. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 14 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44019