https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790796 Writ interference under Article 226 is ordinarily unavailable where a functional and efficacious statutory appellate remedy exists under the GST framework. The Court noted that the petitioner had been put to notice, had filed replies, and had been afforded personal hearings at both the adjudication and appellate stages, so the complaint was not one of total denial of hearing but of disagreement with the findings and appreciation of material. Questions on refund entitlement and sufficiency of supporting documents were held to be matters for the statutory appellate forum. Accordingly, the Court declined to interfere and left the petitioner to pursue the available appellate remedy. en-us Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Apr 2026 07:19:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790796 Writ interference under Article 226 is ordinarily unavailable where a functional and efficacious statutory appellate remedy exists under the GST framework. The Court noted that the petitioner had been put to notice, had filed replies, and had been afforded personal hearings at both the adjudication and appellate stages, so the complaint was not one of total denial of hearing but of disagreement with the findings and appreciation of material. Questions on refund entitlement and sufficiency of supporting documents were held to be matters for the statutory appellate forum. Accordingly, the Court declined to interfere and left the petitioner to pursue the available appellate remedy. Case-Laws GST Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790796