Writ challenge to excise classification notice fails where disputed facts on goods and power-based manufacture require departmental determination.

A writ challenge to an excise show cause notice was declined because the dispute depended on disputed facts about the nature of the goods and whether they were manufactured with the aid of power. The Court noted that classification as steel furniture under Item No. 40 of the First Schedule required the excise authorities to make the initial factual determination, and writ jurisdiction was not appropriate for fact-finding. The petitioner was left to before the departmental authorities and to establish its case in reply to the notice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the show cause notice and the excise authorities' proposed classification could be entertained when the controversy depended on disputed questions of fact as to the nature of the goods and their manufacture with aid of power.

Analysis: The dispute turned on whether the articles manufactured by the petitioner were to be treated as steel furniture under Item No. 40 of the First Schedule and whether they were manufactured with the aid of power. The Court held that the latter issue was purely factual and that even the classification dispute required the Excise Authorities to make the initial determination on the basis of the facts. The Court declined to undertake fact-finding in writ jurisdiction, observing that the petitioner had an adequate opportunity to answer the show cause notice and establish its case before the departmental authorities.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable for grant of relief on the facts presented, and the challenge to the show cause notice failed.

---