https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790341 A challenge to an order-in-original raising GST liability was not entertained under Article 226 because the dispute depended on factual questions about the applicable notification, the nature of the services and transaction, and the correct tax rate. No jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice was shown to justify writ interference. The proper remedy was the statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, with the appellate authority to consider any delay on its merits. The petitioner was therefore relegated to the appellate forum. en-us Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Apr 2026 09:45:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790341 A challenge to an order-in-original raising GST liability was not entertained under Article 226 because the dispute depended on factual questions about the applicable notification, the nature of the services and transaction, and the correct tax rate. No jurisdictional error or breach of natural justice was shown to justify writ interference. The proper remedy was the statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, with the appellate authority to consider any delay on its merits. The petitioner was therefore relegated to the appellate forum. Case-Laws GST Fri, 20 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790341