{"id":76694,"date":"2026-09-19T08:20:50","date_gmt":"2026-09-19T08:20:50","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2026-09-19T08:20:50","modified_gmt":"2026-09-19T08:20:50","slug":"alternative-statutory-remedy-in-gst-adjudication-generally-bars-writ-review-after-an-order-in-original-absent-patent-jurisdictional-error","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/?p=76694","title":{"rendered":"Alternative statutory remedy in GST adjudication generally bars writ review after an Order-in-Original, absent patent jurisdictional error."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Alternative statutory remedy in GST adjudication generally bars writ review after an Order-in-Original, absent patent jurisdictional error.<br \/>Case-Laws<br \/>GST<br \/>Availability of an efficacious statutory appeal materially constrains Article 226 writ jurisdiction in GST adjudication. Once show-cause proceedings culminate in an Order-in-Original, disputes over overlapping State and Central input tax credit proceedings, factual and evidentiary material, and a multi-year notice should ordinarily be examined on appeal. A statutory pre-deposit obligation and the earlier filing of a writ during pending notice proceedings do not alone justify bypassing that remedy. Absent patent jurisdictional infirmity, appellate review remains available on all permissible grounds; the writ petition was dismissed with liberty to appeal.<br \/> TMI Updates &#8211; Highlights, quick notes, marquee, annotation, news, alerts <\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n<p align=\"center\"><strong>Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong><BR>For full text:-<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxtmi.com\/highlights?id=103972\">Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n<p align=\"center\">=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Alternative statutory remedy in GST adjudication generally bars writ review after an Order-in-Original, absent patent jurisdictional error.Case-LawsGSTAvailability of an efficacious statutory appeal materially constrains Article 226 writ jurisdiction i&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"close","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-76694","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76694","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=76694"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/76694\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=76694"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=76694"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=76694"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}