Writ jurisdiction on pure tax law issues can survive alternative remedy objections even at the show cause notice stage.

Pure questions of law on the taxability of passive infrastructure services, the effect of an earlier determination under Section 80 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, and the validity of a fresh show cause notice on the same issue justified writ jurisdiction. The Court held that the availability of an alternative remedy was not an absolute bar where the controversy turned on legal issues, and the petition was not to be rejected merely because it had reached the show cause stage. The preliminary objection was overruled, and the writ petition was entertained for merits hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be entertained notwithstanding the availability of an alternative remedy and the fact that the matter was at the stage of show cause notice, in view of the pure questions of law raised.

Analysis: The challenge raised substantial questions of law concerning the taxability of passive infrastructure services, the effect of an earlier determination order under Section 80 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, and whether the fresh show cause notice could be issued on the same issue despite the earlier determination. The Court held that these were pure questions of law requiring consideration in writ jurisdiction and that the petition should not be rejected merely because the matter had reached the stage of show cause notice. Reliance was placed on the principle that where the controversy turns on pure legal issues, the existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to writ relief.

Conclusion: The preliminary objection based on alternative remedy was overruled, and the writ petition was entertained for merits hearing.

---