https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789616 Where a statutory appeal mechanism and recovery-stay procedure exist under the CGST framework, the HC declined to examine the merits of the GST appellate orders and consequential recovery notices in writ jurisdiction. It held that the petitioner could pursue the alternative remedy under Section 112 and the relevant CBIC circulars by making the prescribed pre-deposit, filing the required undertaking before the jurisdictional proper officer, and complying with the stipulated timeline, with recovery of the remaining demand stayed until the GST Appellate Tribunal becomes operational. The writ petitions were disposed of with liberty to follow that statutory and circular-based procedure. en-us Mon, 06 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Apr 2026 09:02:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789616 Where a statutory appeal mechanism and recovery-stay procedure exist under the CGST framework, the HC declined to examine the merits of the GST appellate orders and consequential recovery notices in writ jurisdiction. It held that the petitioner could pursue the alternative remedy under Section 112 and the relevant CBIC circulars by making the prescribed pre-deposit, filing the required undertaking before the jurisdictional proper officer, and complying with the stipulated timeline, with recovery of the remaining demand stayed until the GST Appellate Tribunal becomes operational. The writ petitions were disposed of with liberty to follow that statutory and circular-based procedure. Case-Laws GST Mon, 06 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789616