https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45373 Where an effective statutory remedy exists under the Central Excise Act, the writ court should not ordinarily bypass the statutory adjudicatory process, and the impugned writ order was set aside. The refund claim under Section 11B was directed to be considered by the competent excise authority on merits, with limitation and pre-deposit objections not to defeat consideration at the remanded stage. The dispute was therefore sent back for fresh decision in accordance with law. en-us Tue, 15 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jul 2010 11:58:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45373 Where an effective statutory remedy exists under the Central Excise Act, the writ court should not ordinarily bypass the statutory adjudicatory process, and the impugned writ order was set aside. The refund claim under Section 11B was directed to be considered by the competent excise authority on merits, with limitation and pre-deposit objections not to defeat consideration at the remanded stage. The dispute was therefore sent back for fresh decision in accordance with law. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 15 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45373