https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44685 Writ petitions challenging show cause notices under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 were found not maintainable because an effective statutory remedy before the excise authority was available and had not been exhausted. Applying the settled principle that writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 is ordinarily not exercised when an alternative remedy exists, the HC declined to examine the notices on merits and refused to entertain the challenge. en-us Tue, 29 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Jul 2010 11:59:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44685 Writ petitions challenging show cause notices under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 were found not maintainable because an effective statutory remedy before the excise authority was available and had not been exhausted. Applying the settled principle that writ jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 is ordinarily not exercised when an alternative remedy exists, the HC declined to examine the notices on merits and refused to entertain the challenge. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44685