https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96155 The court addressed whether extraordinary writ relief was maintainable where an alternate statutory remedy with a pre-deposit exists and whether the impugned order was time-barred or tainted by denial of natural justice; factual mixed-questions (service, exemption status, limitation) required adjudication and did not justify bypassing the statutory remedy. The statutory pre-deposit requirement was held not to render the remedy inefficacious. Consequently the writ was declined; petitioner directed to file the prescribed statutory appeal within six weeks after complying with pre-conditions including pre-deposit, and the appellate authority must decide the appeal on merits without disputing limitation. - HC en-us Mon, 19 Jan 2026 07:36:44 +0530 Mon, 19 Jan 2026 07:36:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96155 The court addressed whether extraordinary writ relief was maintainable where an alternate statutory remedy with a pre-deposit exists and whether the impugned order was time-barred or tainted by denial of natural justice; factual mixed-questions (service, exemption status, limitation) required adjudication and did not justify bypassing the statutory remedy. The statutory pre-deposit requirement was held not to render the remedy inefficacious. Consequently the writ was declined; petitioner directed to file the prescribed statutory appeal within six weeks after complying with pre-conditions including pre-deposit, and the appellate authority must decide the appeal on merits without disputing limitation. - HC Highlights GST Mon, 19 Jan 2026 07:36:44 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96155