https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47647 Where an efficacious statutory appeal exists in anti-dumping matters, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be invoked merely because the dispute is important or sensitive; the High Court was therefore not justified in entertaining the writ petition. An interim order affecting the parties and liable to higher scrutiny must record at least brief reasons, and the unexplained grant of interim relief was unsustainable. The matter was accordingly left to the statutory appellate remedy before CESTAT, with the time spent in writ proceedings protected for limitation purposes in favour of the respondent. en-us Wed, 09 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Dec 2016 10:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47647 Where an efficacious statutory appeal exists in anti-dumping matters, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 should not be invoked merely because the dispute is important or sensitive; the High Court was therefore not justified in entertaining the writ petition. An interim order affecting the parties and liable to higher scrutiny must record at least brief reasons, and the unexplained grant of interim relief was unsustainable. The matter was accordingly left to the statutory appellate remedy before CESTAT, with the time spent in writ proceedings protected for limitation purposes in favour of the respondent. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 09 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47647