Writ interference with a pre-decided show-cause notice is justified when the notice is effectively decisional and without jurisdiction.

A writ court may interfere with a show-cause notice where the notice is without jurisdiction or is effectively pre-decisional rather than a genuine opportunity to show cause. Here, the notice went beyond initiating proceedings and contained detailed rebuttal of the assessee's reply, indicating that the authority had already pre-judged the matter. On that basis, the challenge was maintainable and the impugned notice could not be sustained. The proceedings were required to be redone by issuing a fresh notice and giving a proper opportunity of reply before any adjudication.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ court can interfere with a show-cause notice that is alleged to be pre-decided and issued without jurisdiction.

Analysis: A challenge to a show-cause notice is ordinarily not entertained, but interference is warranted where the notice suffers from lack of jurisdiction or is, in substance, an order already deciding the matter. The notice in question contained detailed rebuttal of the assessee's reply and proceeded on the footing that action had to be taken, which indicated that the authority had pre-judged the matter rather than merely initiated proceedings. The procedure adopted did not satisfy the legal requirements for a valid show-cause notice and the proceedings had to be redone by issuing a fresh notice and affording a proper opportunity of reply before adjudication.

Conclusion: The challenge was maintainable and the impugned notice could not be sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ court may interfere with a show-cause notice where the notice is issued without jurisdiction or is effectively premeditated and decisional in character rather than a genuine notice to show cause.

---