https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47130 Where a taxing statute provides an efficacious reference mechanism for questions of law, a writ petition under Article 226 should ordinarily not be entertained if the same statutory remedy is already being pursued on the same subject matter. The Central Excise Act scheme under Sections 35H, 35J and 35K is described as a complete route for reference and consequential disposal in conformity with the High Court's opinion. The ordinary rule of judicial restraint applies when the statute creates a hierarchy of remedies, and bypassing that route is justified only in exceptional cases such as lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, or a vires challenge. Parallel pursuit of writ and reference remedies is therefore impermissible. en-us Fri, 23 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:37:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47130 Where a taxing statute provides an efficacious reference mechanism for questions of law, a writ petition under Article 226 should ordinarily not be entertained if the same statutory remedy is already being pursued on the same subject matter. The Central Excise Act scheme under Sections 35H, 35J and 35K is described as a complete route for reference and consequential disposal in conformity with the High Court's opinion. The ordinary rule of judicial restraint applies when the statute creates a hierarchy of remedies, and bypassing that route is justified only in exceptional cases such as lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, or a vires challenge. Parallel pursuit of writ and reference remedies is therefore impermissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 23 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47130