Writ jurisdiction and GST assessment disputes: factual issues and no natural justice breach required resort to statutory appeal.

A challenge to an order-in-original raising GST liability was not entertained under Article 226 because the dispute depended on factual questions about the applicable notification, the nature of the services and transaction, and the correct tax rate. No jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice was shown to justify writ interference. The proper remedy was the statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, with the appellate authority to consider any delay on its merits. The petitioner was therefore relegated to the appellate forum.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained against the order-in-original, or the petitioner should be relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.

Analysis: The challenge was to an order-in-original raising GST liability under the relevant tax enactments. The dispute turned on factual questions concerning the applicable notification, the nature of the services and the transaction, and the rate of tax, none of which involved a jurisdictional error or violation of natural justice warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The proper course was therefore to avail the statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, with the appellate authority to consider delay, if any, on its merits.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained and the petitioner was relegated to the appellate remedy.

---