Writ challenge to tax notice held premature where no prejudice was shown and no adverse order had yet been passed.

A writ challenge to an income-tax notice calling for books of account and other material was held premature where no adverse order had yet been passed and no prejudice was demonstrated. The Court noted that writ jurisdiction is discretionary and is ordinarily declined at this stage because the assessee can present a defence before the authority. Since the notice only required appearance and production of relevant material, the petition was not entertained, and any grievance was left open to be raised if an adverse order is later made.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition challenging a notice calling for books of account and other material was maintainable in the absence of demonstrated prejudice to the petitioner, and whether the Court should exercise writ jurisdiction at that stage.

Analysis: The notice merely required the petitioner to appear before the income-tax authority and produce relevant material. The Court held that writ jurisdiction is discretionary and is ordinarily not exercised unless a legal violation is accompanied by prejudice. As no adverse order had yet been passed, and the petitioner could raise his defence before the authority, the challenge was held to be premature. The Court also noted that any grievance could be pursued if and when an adverse order was subsequently made.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained and the challenge to the notice failed for want of prejudice and on the ground of prematurity; the petitioner was left to pursue remedies at the appropriate stage.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition challenging a notice will not be entertained where no prejudice is shown and no adverse order has yet been passed, because writ jurisdiction is discretionary and may be declined at the premature stage.

---