Writ interference with VAT show-cause notices is limited where jurisdiction and taxable event require factual inquiry.

Writ jurisdiction ordinarily does not interfere with a show-cause notice issued in VAT proceedings unless the notice is demonstrably without authority or ex facie without jurisdiction. Because the dealer had already replied to an earlier notice and the impugned notice continued that proceeding, the dispute whether the activity involved a taxable event under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 required factual examination by the assessing authority. The notice was therefore not treated as non est, and the petitioner was left to raise all objections before the statutory authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition could be entertained against a show-cause notice issued in VAT proceedings on the ground that the notice was without jurisdiction because there was no transfer of right to use goods and no taxable event.

Analysis: A writ court ordinarily does not interfere at the stage of a show-cause notice, because judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against a decision-making process and not against a preliminary notice calling for an explanation. Interference is justified only where the notice is shown to be palpably without authority or ex facie without jurisdiction. Here, the dealer had already responded to an earlier VAT notice proposing levy on the material handling activity, and the impugned notice was issued in continuation of that proceeding. On a perusal of the contracts, the issue whether the activity amounted to a taxable event under the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2005 required factual examination by the assessing authority. The contention that the notice was non est was therefore not accepted.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable at the notice stage and the show-cause notice was not quashed. The petitioner was left to raise all objections before the assessing authority.

Ratio Decidendi: A show-cause notice is not to be interfered with in writ jurisdiction unless it is demonstrably without authority or jurisdiction on its face; where the existence of a taxable event requires factual enquiry, the issue must first be decided by the statutory authority.

---