https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757236 Writ jurisdiction was declined because the challenge turned on disputed facts, including whether the supplier was a bogus concern, and did not disclose any jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice. The Court held that the existence of an effective alternative remedy barred invocation of extraordinary writ powers, so the petition was dismissed. It also protected the petitioner's statutory remedy by directing that, if the appeal is filed within three months, the Appellate Authority must decide it on merits without raising limitation. en-us Thu, 25 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 14:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757236 Writ jurisdiction was declined because the challenge turned on disputed facts, including whether the supplier was a bogus concern, and did not disclose any jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice. The Court held that the existence of an effective alternative remedy barred invocation of extraordinary writ powers, so the petition was dismissed. It also protected the petitioner's statutory remedy by directing that, if the appeal is filed within three months, the Appellate Authority must decide it on merits without raising limitation. Case-Laws GST Thu, 25 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757236