Statutory appellate remedy limits writ review where GST adjudication is challenged after unexplained delay.

Writ jurisdiction was declined against an adjudication order under the GST regime because the statutory appellate remedy was available and the petitioners had not adequately explained their delay in approaching the Court. The Court noted that the petitioners had received the show-cause notice, failed to file a timely reply, and had sought adjournment before the authority proceeded further. It held that disputed questions of fact should not be examined in writ proceedings when the GST scheme provides a multi-tier appellate process at the first instance. The petitioners were directed to pursue the statutory appeal, with liberty to seek condonation of delay.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging an adjudication order under Section 73 of the GST regime should be entertained in view of the availability of an appellate remedy and the petitioners' delay in approaching the Court.

Analysis: The petitioners had been served with the show-cause notice, did not file a response within time, and had sought adjournment. The Court noted that the adjudicating authority thereafter proceeded with the matter. It held that disputed questions of fact ought not to be examined in writ proceedings when the statutory scheme provides a multi-tier appellate remedy at the first instance. The writ petition was also found to have been filed belatedly without adequate explanation.

Outcome: The Court declined to entertain the writ petition and left the petitioners to pursue the statutory appeal, with liberty to seek condonation of delay.

---