Premature tax demand notice cannot be challenged when statutory quantification is pending and remedies for instalment payment remain available.

Rule 28-A(3) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 requires tax demanded in Form XII-C to be paid within seven days of service of that notice. Where computation and quantification had not yet been completed and the proper Form XII-C notice had not been issued, the impugned demand notice was treated as premature and not fit for interference. The Court also noted that the assessee could seek extension of time or permission to pay by instalments from the Commissioner under section 22(4-A) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958. In that setting, no surviving grievance was shown to justify relief against the notice.

---

---

Issues: Whether a notice to pay advance tax could be quashed when computation and quantification in Form XII-C had not yet been made, and whether the petitioner had any surviving grievance warranting interference.

Analysis: Rule 28-A(3) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 requires the tax demanded in Form XII-C to be paid within 7 days of service of the notice. The Court noted that, on the respondent's statement, computation and quantification were yet to be done and the proper notice in Form XII-C had not yet been forwarded. In that situation, the impugned demand notice was treated as premature and inconsequential. The Court also recorded that the petitioner could approach the Commissioner for extension of time or permission to pay by instalments under section 22(4-A) of the M.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958.

Conclusion: The challenge to the impugned notice failed, and no relief was granted on that basis.

Ratio Decidendi: A premature or unquantified demand notice that does not conform to the statutory notice procedure does not furnish a justiciable cause for interference where the proper notice is yet to be issued and statutory administrative remedies remain available.

---