https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398512 Where the GST regime provides an efficacious statutory appeal against rejection of a refund claim, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used to bypass that remedy; the challenge to the first refund rejection was therefore not entertained and the aggrieved party was left to pursue the appellate process. For the second refund application, which remained undecided, the authorities were directed to consider and decide it in accordance with law after hearing the applicant within three weeks. The Delhi HC thus applied the alternative remedy principle to decline interference with the appealable order while requiring expeditious disposal of the pending refund request. en-us Fri, 11 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398512 Where the GST regime provides an efficacious statutory appeal against rejection of a refund claim, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used to bypass that remedy; the challenge to the first refund rejection was therefore not entertained and the aggrieved party was left to pursue the appellate process. For the second refund application, which remained undecided, the authorities were directed to consider and decide it in accordance with law after hearing the applicant within three weeks. The Delhi HC thus applied the alternative remedy principle to decline interference with the appealable order while requiring expeditious disposal of the pending refund request. Case-Laws GST Fri, 11 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398512