Alternate statutory remedy bars writ interference against GST adjudication order absent exceptional circumstances.

A writ petition challenging an adjudication order under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act was held not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal under Section 107 was available. The High Court reiterated that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily not exercised where an adequate appellate remedy exists, absent exceptional circumstances. The petitioner's grievance regarding cross-examination did not justify interference at the writ stage, as that issue could be pursued in the statutory appeal. The court therefore declined to interfere with the adjudication order and left the petitioner to avail the appellate remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging an adjudication order under the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was maintainable when an efficacious statutory appeal was available.

Analysis: The adjudication order was passed under Section 74 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the statutory scheme provided an appeal under Section 107 of the same Act. The existence of an adequate appellate remedy ordinarily bars recourse to writ jurisdiction, unless exceptional circumstances are shown. No such exceptional circumstance was demonstrated. The Court also recorded that the grievance regarding cross-examination did not warrant writ interference at this stage, in view of the statutory appellate remedy.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable in the facts of the case and was dismissed in view of the alternate remedy available to the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The petitioner was left to pursue the statutory appellate remedy, and the High Court declined to interfere with the adjudication order in writ jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, writ jurisdiction will not ordinarily be exercised in the absence of exceptional circumstances.

---