+HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C ) No. 895/2025 M/S AAR BEE Industries ..... appellant (s) Through :- Mr. Sagir Ahmed Khan Advocate. UOI and others .....Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. Dheeraj Nanda CGSC. Coram: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.CHOWDHARY, JUDGE ORDER Sanjeev Kumar ACJ 1 Impugned in this petition is an order dated 14/18.11/2024, passed by respondent No.3 whereby he has sanctioned an amount of Rs.4,34,609/-and rejected an amount of Rs.1,80,128 on account of Education Cess and Rs. 78,688/- on account of S&H Education Cess, refund whereof was claimed by the petitioner. 2 Indisputably, the impugned order is amenable to challenge by way of a statutory appeal under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (‘the Act’ for short), and, therefore, the petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directly before this Court, is not maintainable, more particularly when the case does not fall under any of the exceptions carved out by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai & Ors., 1998 (8) SCC 1. It is not a case where the order impugned has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, nor is the vires of any provision of the Act under challenge. There is no Sr. No. 4 2 challenge even to the jurisdiction of respondent No.3, who has passed the impugned order. 3 For the foregoing reasons, this petition is held not maintainable and is, accordingly, dismissed, with a liberty to the petitioner to avail of the remedy of statutory appeal available under the Act. (M.A.CHOWDHARY) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE (A) JAMMU 15.04.2025 Sanjeev