https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438076 The HC held that the writ petition challenging the impugned order was not maintainable as the petitioner failed to file the statutory appeal within the prescribed limitation under Section 107 of the Act of 2017. The limitation for filing the appeal was 30 days, extendable by one month under certain conditions, which the petitioner did not meet. Filing the writ petition nearly eight months after the expiry of the limitation period was impermissible. The Court relied on SC precedent confirming that once the limitation for appeal expires, extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked to challenge the order. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. en-us Wed, 03 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Aug 2025 14:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438076 The HC held that the writ petition challenging the impugned order was not maintainable as the petitioner failed to file the statutory appeal within the prescribed limitation under Section 107 of the Act of 2017. The limitation for filing the appeal was 30 days, extendable by one month under certain conditions, which the petitioner did not meet. Filing the writ petition nearly eight months after the expiry of the limitation period was impermissible. The Court relied on SC precedent confirming that once the limitation for appeal expires, extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked to challenge the order. Consequently, the petition was dismissed. Case-Laws GST Wed, 03 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438076