Statutory appeal under GST prevails over writ jurisdiction where the challenge turns on disputed facts and no perversity is shown.

Writ petitions challenging GST assessment orders were not entertained because an effective statutory appeal was available and the dispute involved questions of fact. The Court found no demonstrated procedural irregularity or perversity in the orders passed after consideration of the replies to the show cause notices, and held that the appellate remedy was the appropriate course. The petitioners were allowed to pursue appeals on depositing 25% of the disputed tax as pre-deposit within the stipulated time, and the appellate authority was directed to decide the appeals on merits without reference to limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions challenging the assessment orders under the GST enactments were liable to be entertained in view of the availability of statutory appeal.

Analysis: The impugned orders were passed after consideration of the replies to the show cause notices. No procedural irregularity or perversity in the making of the orders was shown. The challenge raised disputed questions of fact, for which the statutory appellate remedy was held to be the appropriate course. The petitioners were permitted to avail appeal on depositing 25% of the disputed tax as pre-deposit within the stipulated period, with the appellate authority directed to decide the appeals on merits and without reference to limitation.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were not entertained and were dismissed, leaving the petitioners to pursue the statutory appeals.

Final Conclusion: The Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction over the GST orders and directed the petitioners to work out their remedy before the appellate authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an effective statutory appeal is available and the challenge turns on disputed facts without demonstrated procedural irregularity or perversity, writ jurisdiction need not be invoked.

---