Statutory appeal remedies bar writ interference in GST release orders absent natural justice breach or jurisdictional error.

Writ jurisdiction was held not to be the proper remedy where the impugned GST release order was appealable under the statutory scheme and the petitioner did not avail that appellate remedy within time. The Court noted that the person-in-charge had paid the tax and penalty proposed, leading to release of the goods and conveyance, and there was no contemporaneous protest showing coercion or objection. In the absence of demonstrated violation of natural justice or jurisdictional error, direct interference in writ proceedings was not warranted, and the petition was dismissed for failure to pursue the available appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was maintainable when the petitioner had an effective statutory appeal against the order arising from detention and release of goods under the GST regime, and whether any case for interference was made out on the grounds of violation of natural justice or jurisdictional error.

Analysis: The release order recorded that the person-in-charge had come forward and paid the tax and penalty proposed, whereupon the goods and conveyance were released. The Court found no material to show any contemporaneous protest by the petitioner at the time of payment. It further noted that the impugned order was appealable under the GST law and that an appeal lay within the prescribed period, which the petitioner had not pursued. In these circumstances, and in the absence of demonstrated violation of natural justice or any jurisdictional error, the Court held that direct recourse to writ jurisdiction was not warranted.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained and was dismissed for failure to avail the statutory appellate remedy.

---