^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

MJ GOLD vs. STATE TAX OFFICER & OTHERS
(Kerala High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

GOPINATH P.
SYAM KUMAR V.M.

Pet. Counsel

Tomson T.emmanuel

Res. Counsel

Sreelal N Warrier

Petitioner / Applicant	MJ GOLD
Respondent	STATE TAX OFFICER & OTHERS
Court	Kerala High Court
State	Kerala
Date	May 7, 2024
Order No.	WA NO. 608 OF 2024
Citation	2024(5) TAXREPLY 10783
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
JUDGMENT GOPINATH P, J. The appellant filed a writ petition challenging the order annexed as Ext.P5 to the writ petition. A learned Single Judge of this Court by judgment dated 01.04.2024, dismissed the writ petition for reasons recorded in the judgment. It was specifically found that the appellant had failed to avail of the opportunities before the original authority and therefore no ground was made out for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that Ext.P5 is dated 21.11.2023 and the writ petition was filed challenging the said order on 15.03.2024. It is submitted that while declining jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the learned Single Judge ought to have at least protected the right of the appellant to file a statutory appeal against Ext.P5 order as the writ petition was filed within the condonable period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST ....