Writ interference against a tax revision show cause notice was declined; the Commissioner must first examine its validity.

Interference under article 226 against a show cause notice issued under section 22-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was held unwarranted at the notice stage. The Court noted that the Full Bench had already rejected the challenge to the scope and constitutional validity of section 22-A, but the petitioner could still argue before the Commissioner that the appellate order did not justify revision under that provision. Whether the notice was justified, and the relevance of the cited Orissa decision, were matters for the Commissioner to examine first. In the absence of a concluded adverse order, the writ petition was not maintainable and was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court should interfere under article 226 with a show cause notice issued under section 22-A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, proposing revision of an appellate order under section 20 of the Act, and whether such challenge could succeed on the ground that the provision did not authorise interference with an appellate order or was violative of article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The Full Bench opinion had already negatived the petitioner's attack on the scope and constitutional validity of section 22-A. Even so, the Court held that the petitioner could raise before the Commissioner the contention that the appellate order did not warrant revision under section 22-A. The question whether the notice was justified, and whether the cited Orissa decision had any relevance, was a matter for the Commissioner to examine first. In the absence of a concluded adverse order, interference at the notice stage was unwarranted, particularly when any final adverse order would be open to challenge in appeal.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable at the stage of the show cause notice and was dismissed.

---