https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766612 Writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily be invoked against a GST assessment where an efficacious statutory appeal remedy exists and the challenge is brought after expiry of the prescribed limitation. The High Court noted that the order-in-original was physically signed and passed within the extended limitation period, so the later summary in DRC-07 did not vitiate the underlying order. It also held that the absence of a signature on DRC-07, by itself, did not cause prejudice or justify interference. Accordingly, the writ petition was found not entertainable and relief was declined. en-us Thu, 20 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Feb 2025 08:23:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766612 Writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily be invoked against a GST assessment where an efficacious statutory appeal remedy exists and the challenge is brought after expiry of the prescribed limitation. The High Court noted that the order-in-original was physically signed and passed within the extended limitation period, so the later summary in DRC-07 did not vitiate the underlying order. It also held that the absence of a signature on DRC-07, by itself, did not cause prejudice or justify interference. Accordingly, the writ petition was found not entertainable and relief was declined. Case-Laws GST Thu, 20 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766612