https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793364 Where the validity of an impugned GST action turns on a disputed factual question, such as whether prior notice under Section 142(1)(a) was issued, the issue is ordinarily not fit for writ adjudication under Article 226. The presence of an efficacious statutory remedy further supports refusal to entertain the writ petition. The Court therefore found no error in declining writ jurisdiction on the ground of alternative remedy, and the writ appeal was dismissed. en-us Mon, 25 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Jun 2026 08:36:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793364 Where the validity of an impugned GST action turns on a disputed factual question, such as whether prior notice under Section 142(1)(a) was issued, the issue is ordinarily not fit for writ adjudication under Article 226. The presence of an efficacious statutory remedy further supports refusal to entertain the writ petition. The Court therefore found no error in declining writ jurisdiction on the ground of alternative remedy, and the writ appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws GST Mon, 25 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793364