https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768587 The Chhattisgarh HC held that while a writ petition challenging a GST demand order was maintainable under Article 226, it should not be entertained due to availability of adequate alternative statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The court distinguished between maintainability and entertainability, noting that despite recognizing exceptions to the alternative remedy rule, the petitioner failed to establish exceptional circumstances warranting interference in the court's discretionary jurisdiction. The writ petition was dismissed, with the petitioner directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. en-us Fri, 04 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Jun 2025 19:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768587 The Chhattisgarh HC held that while a writ petition challenging a GST demand order was maintainable under Article 226, it should not be entertained due to availability of adequate alternative statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The court distinguished between maintainability and entertainability, noting that despite recognizing exceptions to the alternative remedy rule, the petitioner failed to establish exceptional circumstances warranting interference in the court's discretionary jurisdiction. The writ petition was dismissed, with the petitioner directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy. Case-Laws GST Fri, 04 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768587