https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789425 A taxing statute that fixes a three-month appeal period with only a further one-month condonable extension leaves no residual power to revive an appeal after the aggregate 120-day limit expires. The Gujarat HC applied this limitation scheme under the GST law and held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be used to bypass the statutory bar or enlarge the period for filing a GST appeal. It also noted that a party that chose the appellate route and failed to prosecute it cannot later seek merits-based review of the cancellation order or the show-cause notice. The writ challenge was therefore not maintainable and the appellate and cancellation orders were left undisturbed. en-us Thu, 22 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Apr 2026 08:56:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789425 A taxing statute that fixes a three-month appeal period with only a further one-month condonable extension leaves no residual power to revive an appeal after the aggregate 120-day limit expires. The Gujarat HC applied this limitation scheme under the GST law and held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be used to bypass the statutory bar or enlarge the period for filing a GST appeal. It also noted that a party that chose the appellate route and failed to prosecute it cannot later seek merits-based review of the cancellation order or the show-cause notice. The writ challenge was therefore not maintainable and the appellate and cancellation orders were left undisturbed. Case-Laws GST Thu, 22 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789425