https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798188 Article 226 writ jurisdiction was declined against a concluded customs adjudication order because an efficacious statutory appeal was available under the Customs Act. Challenges concerning service of notice, an alleged waiver, adjudication records and confiscation findings required appellate scrutiny rather than extraordinary writ review. Knowledge of seizure, failure to respond to the public notice, non-use of the statutory appeal, and prolonged unexplained inaction weighed against intervention. The governing principle is that alternative statutory remedies should ordinarily be exhausted, although they do not absolutely bar writ jurisdiction. en-us Wed, 02 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Sep 2026 08:20:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798188 Article 226 writ jurisdiction was declined against a concluded customs adjudication order because an efficacious statutory appeal was available under the Customs Act. Challenges concerning service of notice, an alleged waiver, adjudication records and confiscation findings required appellate scrutiny rather than extraordinary writ review. Knowledge of seizure, failure to respond to the public notice, non-use of the statutory appeal, and prolonged unexplained inaction weighed against intervention. The governing principle is that alternative statutory remedies should ordinarily be exhausted, although they do not absolutely bar writ jurisdiction. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 02 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=798188