https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791768 Writ jurisdiction was held not to be the proper remedy where the impugned GST release order was appealable under the statutory scheme and the petitioner did not avail that appellate remedy within time. The Court noted that the person-in-charge had paid the tax and penalty proposed, leading to release of the goods and conveyance, and there was no contemporaneous protest showing coercion or objection. In the absence of demonstrated violation of natural justice or jurisdictional error, direct interference in writ proceedings was not warranted, and the petition was dismissed for failure to pursue the available appeal. en-us Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 May 2026 09:09:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791768 Writ jurisdiction was held not to be the proper remedy where the impugned GST release order was appealable under the statutory scheme and the petitioner did not avail that appellate remedy within time. The Court noted that the person-in-charge had paid the tax and penalty proposed, leading to release of the goods and conveyance, and there was no contemporaneous protest showing coercion or objection. In the absence of demonstrated violation of natural justice or jurisdictional error, direct interference in writ proceedings was not warranted, and the petition was dismissed for failure to pursue the available appeal. Case-Laws GST Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791768