Alternative statutory remedies barred writ review of GST registration cancellation, leaving revocation and appeal under the GST law.

A writ petition challenging cancellation of GST registration was not entertained because the State GST framework provided efficacious alternative remedies. The aggrieved person could seek revocation of cancellation under Section 30 read with Rule 23 of the State GST Rules, 2017, and could also pursue an appeal under Section 107 of the State GST Act, 2017. In view of these statutory remedies, the High Court declined to exercise its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and left the petitioner to pursue the available remedies under the Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging cancellation of GST registration was maintainable in view of the alternative statutory remedies of revocation and appeal under the State GST law.

Analysis: The petitioner invoked writ jurisdiction under Article 226 to assail the cancellation order. The available statutory framework provided a remedy for revocation of cancellation under Section 30 of the State GST Act, 2017 read with Rule 23 of the State GST Rules, 2017, and also an appellate remedy under Section 107 of the State GST Act, 2017. In view of these efficacious alternatives, the Court declined to exercise extraordinary writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained on the ground of availability of alternative remedy, and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory remedies.

---