https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100501 The HC declined to entertain the writ petition because an effective statutory appeal remedy before the CGST Appellate Tribunal was available. It noted that the Tribunal under Section 112 of the CGST Act had started functioning and that, under the notified extension, appeals against orders communicated before 01.04.2026 could be filed up to 30.06.2026. As the impugned order-in-appeal fell within that category, the petitioner could raise the same grounds before the Tribunal. The petitioner was relegated to the appellate remedy with liberty to file the appeal within the extended period. en-us Fri, 05 Jun 2026 08:07:31 +0530 Fri, 05 Jun 2026 08:07:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100501 The HC declined to entertain the writ petition because an effective statutory appeal remedy before the CGST Appellate Tribunal was available. It noted that the Tribunal under Section 112 of the CGST Act had started functioning and that, under the notified extension, appeals against orders communicated before 01.04.2026 could be filed up to 30.06.2026. As the impugned order-in-appeal fell within that category, the petitioner could raise the same grounds before the Tribunal. The petitioner was relegated to the appellate remedy with liberty to file the appeal within the extended period. Highlights GST Fri, 05 Jun 2026 08:07:31 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100501