https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47488 A writ petition is not maintainable where the impugned order is appealable under the statutory central excise framework. Because the order was passed by an Assistant Commissioner, the aggrieved party had an available appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), and the petitioner was required to pursue that remedy instead of directly invoking writ jurisdiction. The Court also noted that the merits of the capacity determination were matters for the appellate forum. The proceedings were therefore rejected on the ground that an efficacious statutory appeal lay against the order. en-us Thu, 27 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Jul 2010 10:58:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47488 A writ petition is not maintainable where the impugned order is appealable under the statutory central excise framework. Because the order was passed by an Assistant Commissioner, the aggrieved party had an available appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), and the petitioner was required to pursue that remedy instead of directly invoking writ jurisdiction. The Court also noted that the merits of the capacity determination were matters for the appellate forum. The proceedings were therefore rejected on the ground that an efficacious statutory appeal lay against the order. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 27 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47488