Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in entertaining a writ petition challenging show cause notices issued under the Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948, and whether the assessee should have been left to pursue the statutory appeal against the assessment order.
Analysis: The notices concerned liability for the period before the eligibility certificate was granted and were not based on the premise that the certificate had been wrongly obtained. The High Court proceeded on an incorrect factual basis. The Court reiterated that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is ordinarily not to be invoked against show cause notices unless, on the face of the notice, no offence is disclosed or the notice is ex facie without jurisdiction. In the present case, those exceptions did not apply, and the proper course was to avail the statutory remedy against the assessment order under section 9 of the Act.
Conclusion: The writ petition ought not to have been entertained, and the assessee was required to pursue the statutory appeal remedy.
Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition challenging a show cause notice is not maintainable where an effective statutory remedy exists, unless the notice is ex facie without jurisdiction or discloses no case on its face.