Alternative remedy objection rejected where refund authority's power to test Input Tax Credit admissibility remained a live jurisdictional issue.

A writ petition challenging refund-processing orders was not rejected for alternative remedy because the challenge went to the foundation of the impugned orders. The jurisdictional question was whether the authority under the IGST Act, read with the CGST Act, could examine the admissibility of Input Tax Credit while processing a refund claim; that issue was considered fit for further consideration. The preliminary objection was overruled, and notice was issued with directions for pleadings in the connected writ petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was liable to be rejected on the ground of an alternative statutory remedy, and whether the respondents had authority while examining a refund claim to go into the admissibility of Input Tax Credit claims.

Analysis: The jurisdictional objection was not accepted because the challenge raised a question going to the foundation of the impugned orders. The objection turned on whether the authority acting under the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 could examine the admissibility of Input Tax Credit while processing a refund claim, and that issue was considered fit for further consideration.

Outcome: The preliminary objection was overruled and notice was issued, with directions for filing of counter affidavit and rejoinder, and tagging of the connected writ petition.

---