Writ jurisdiction and statutory GST appeal: High Court declined interference where email notice service and appellate remedy were available.

Writ jurisdiction was declined where GST demand proceedings had been communicated through the registered email channel contemplated by the notice provisions, and the taxpayer did not establish lack of such service. Because the taxpayer had not used the opportunity to respond before the assessing authority and an efficacious statutory appeal was available under Section 107 of the Uttar Pradesh GST Act, the High Court refused to entertain the writ petition and directed resort to the appellate remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was liable to be entertained despite the availability of an efficacious statutory appeal under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act.

Analysis: The impugned demand order and show cause notices arose under the goods and services tax framework. The Court noted that communication was sent through the registered email channel contemplated by the GST notice provisions and that the petitioner did not show absence of such communication. Since the petitioner had not availed the response opportunity before the assessing authority and a statutory appeal was available under Section 107, the writ jurisdiction was not invoked.

Conclusion: The Court declined to interfere and held that the petitioner should pursue the statutory appellate remedy.

---