https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44200 Writ jurisdiction was declined where the excise dispute turned on contested factual questions about duty quantification and the period of liability, and an efficacious statutory appeal remained available. The challenge to the adjudication was therefore not entertained, with all contentions left open for the appellate authority. The earlier interim direction requiring part-payment of the demand was however varied because subsequent adjudication reduced the quantified liability, and the payment arrangement was adjusted on that reduced basis while preserving the assessee's appeal rights. en-us Tue, 02 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jun 2010 17:44:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44200 Writ jurisdiction was declined where the excise dispute turned on contested factual questions about duty quantification and the period of liability, and an efficacious statutory appeal remained available. The challenge to the adjudication was therefore not entertained, with all contentions left open for the appellate authority. The earlier interim direction requiring part-payment of the demand was however varied because subsequent adjudication reduced the quantified liability, and the payment arrangement was adjusted on that reduced basis while preserving the assessee's appeal rights. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44200