Delayed revival of show cause notices fails where call book transfer and mandatory procedural safeguards are not properly shown.

Revival of long-pending show cause notices was held unsustainable where the department could not show a lawful call book transfer, timely communication to the noticees, or compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards. The Court treated delayed resurrection of adjudicatory proceedings, after years of inaction attributable to the revenue, as contrary to procedural fairness and natural justice because the noticees could reasonably assume the matter had not been pursued and were prejudiced in their defence. On that basis, the impugned notices and consequential proceedings were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revival of long-pending show cause notices, allegedly kept in the call book without communication to the noticees and without demonstrated compliance with the governing circulars, was arbitrary and liable to be quashed.

Analysis: The notices had remained unattended for several years, and the record did not satisfactorily show that a conscious decision to transfer them to the call book was taken in accordance with the prescribed procedure or with prior approval of the competent authority. No timely intimation of call book transfer was given to the noticees, and the belated revival after a long gap caused serious prejudice because the noticees could reasonably assume that the proceedings had not been pursued. The Court treated such delayed resurrection of adjudicatory proceedings as contrary to procedural fairness and natural justice, especially where the delay was attributable to the revenue and not to the noticees.

Conclusion: The revival of the show cause notices was unjustified and the impugned notices and consequential proceedings were quashed in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: Long-dormant adjudication proceedings cannot be revived in a manner that defeats fairness and prejudices the noticee, particularly where the call book transfer itself is not shown to have been made and communicated in accordance with mandatory instructions.

Ratio Decidendi: Revival of a show cause notice after inordinate delay is unsustainable where the department cannot show lawful call book transfer, timely communication to the noticee, and compliance with mandatory procedural safeguards, and the delay causes prejudice to the defence.

---