https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786532 A writ under Article 226 cannot be used to impugn dismissal of an appeal for non fulfilment of the statutory pre deposit requirement; compliance with Section 35F of the Customs Act, 1962 is a mandatory precondition to maintain an appeal before the Tribunal and an available statutory appellate remedy precludes collateral constitutional relief. Payments made by a separate entity cannot be appropriated or adjusted to satisfy another person's pre deposit obligation in the absence of any statutory provision authorising such appropriation. On these grounds the writ petition was dismissed and the challenge to the Tribunal's dismissal rejected. en-us Tue, 10 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Feb 2026 08:29:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786532 A writ under Article 226 cannot be used to impugn dismissal of an appeal for non fulfilment of the statutory pre deposit requirement; compliance with Section 35F of the Customs Act, 1962 is a mandatory precondition to maintain an appeal before the Tribunal and an available statutory appellate remedy precludes collateral constitutional relief. Payments made by a separate entity cannot be appropriated or adjusted to satisfy another person's pre deposit obligation in the absence of any statutory provision authorising such appropriation. On these grounds the writ petition was dismissed and the challenge to the Tribunal's dismissal rejected. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 10 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786532