https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402710 A petition under Article 32 challenging CGST provisions and the legality of an investigation was not entertained because an efficacious remedy was available under Article 226 before the High Court for testing the statutory validity, while grievances concerning the investigation could be pursued before the competent forum under the Code of Criminal Procedure, including Section 482 or analogous provisions. The Court stressed the settled availability of ordinary remedies and the discretionary character of Article 32 jurisdiction in such matters. The petitioner was therefore relegated to the alternative remedies in law, and the merits of the constitutional challenge and investigation were left undecided. en-us Thu, 07 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Mar 2025 10:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402710 A petition under Article 32 challenging CGST provisions and the legality of an investigation was not entertained because an efficacious remedy was available under Article 226 before the High Court for testing the statutory validity, while grievances concerning the investigation could be pursued before the competent forum under the Code of Criminal Procedure, including Section 482 or analogous provisions. The Court stressed the settled availability of ordinary remedies and the discretionary character of Article 32 jurisdiction in such matters. The petitioner was therefore relegated to the alternative remedies in law, and the merits of the constitutional challenge and investigation were left undecided. Case-Laws GST Thu, 07 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402710