GST writ challenge declined as statutory appeal remained available, with delay condonation, pre-deposit, and lien relief left to the appellate authority.

A writ challenge to a GST show cause notice and consequential order, including an objection that they were not authenticated by physical or digital signature, was not entertained because the petitioner had an available statutory appeal. The petitioner was directed to file the appeal within two weeks with a delay condonation application and statutory pre-deposit, leaving it to the appellate authority to consider delay and decide the matter on merits if the explanation is satisfactory. Liberty was also reserved to seek lifting of the lien before the appellate authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the show cause notice and the order passed under the GST law ought to be entertained in view of the availability of the appellate remedy.

Analysis: The petitioner sought to assail the notice and the consequential order on the ground that they were not authenticated by physical or digital signature. The Court declined to go into the merits because the petitioner was permitted to pursue the statutory appeal. The petitioner was directed to approach the appellate authority within two weeks with a delay condonation application and statutory pre-deposit, and it was left open to the appellate authority to consider delay and decide the appeal on merits if satisfied with the explanation. Liberty was also reserved to seek lifting of the lien before the appellate authority.

Conclusion: The writ remedy was declined and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.

---