https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772468 A GST writ petition challenged a consolidated demand, the jurisdiction of the impugned order, the levy on ENA, and reliance on the amendment to Section 9 of the CGST Act. The Bombay High Court recorded a prima facie view that the petition could be entertained under Article 226 despite the availability of an alternate statutory remedy, while noting the respondent's request to keep that question open and to answer the legal submissions later. Interim protection was granted by staying the impugned order, and notice was issued for further consideration. en-us Thu, 30 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Jun 2025 15:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772468 A GST writ petition challenged a consolidated demand, the jurisdiction of the impugned order, the levy on ENA, and reliance on the amendment to Section 9 of the CGST Act. The Bombay High Court recorded a prima facie view that the petition could be entertained under Article 226 despite the availability of an alternate statutory remedy, while noting the respondent's request to keep that question open and to answer the legal submissions later. Interim protection was granted by staying the impugned order, and notice was issued for further consideration. Case-Laws GST Thu, 30 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772468