Writ challenge to section 263 notice fails absent clear lack of jurisdiction or facial untenability

Writ jurisdiction cannot ordinarily be used to quash a show-cause notice issued under section 263 of the Income-tax Act where the notice discloses revisional grounds on its face. The Court held that objections based on the assessee's merits must first be examined by the Commissioner, and interference at the notice stage is justified only when there is a total absence of jurisdiction or the notice is patently untenable on the stated grounds. Since the notice here did not cross that threshold, the writ petition was held not maintainable and dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition could be entertained to quash a show-cause notice issued under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the absence of a total want of jurisdiction or patent untenability in the grounds stated in the notice.

Analysis: The notice proposed revision of assessments on stated grounds, including a possible disallowance under section 43B. The Court held that the petitioner's explanations on merits were matters for the Commissioner to examine in the first instance. In writ jurisdiction, especially in the nature of prohibition, interference is warranted only where there is a total absence of jurisdiction or the notice is untenable on its face on the grounds stated. The grounds disclosed in the notice did not satisfy that threshold.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable for interference at the notice stage and was dismissed.

---