Statutory remedies under CGST/KGST must be pursued for notices and orders, with writ period excluded from limitation.

The petitioner did not press the challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the CGST Act or the corresponding KGST provisions, and the Court therefore did not examine or decide that issue or the alternative request to read the provisions down. It held that the petitioner must pursue the statutory remedies available under the CGST/KGST scheme in relation to the impugned orders and show cause notices, including filing replies where required, rather than seek writ relief. The Court further directed that the period spent prosecuting the writ petition be excluded while computing limitation for any appeal or response to notices, preserving access to the statutory forum.

---

---

Outcome: The challenge to the constitutional validity and the prayer to read down the impugned provisions were not pressed, and the writ petition was disposed of leaving the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy.

---