Statutory remedy over final civil relief where excise show cause notice remains pending and Rule 10A is valid.

A trial court decree based on the supposed invalidity and time-bar of an excise show cause notice could not stand after the Supreme Court had upheld Rule 10A as intra vires, so the notice had to be tested in the changed legal setting. The court also emphasised that, where an effective statutory remedy remained available before the excise authority and the enquiry was still pending, final civil or writ relief should ordinarily not be granted. The assessee was therefore required to respond to the notice and pursue objections within the statutory process, with all issues left open before the competent authority.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the declaration and injunction granted by the trial court on the footing that the show cause notice was invalid because Rule 10A was ultra vires and the notice was time-barred could be sustained. (ii) Whether the writ petition and suit should be entertained to grant final relief when the assessee had an effective statutory remedy before the excise authority.

Issue (i): Whether the declaration and injunction granted by the trial court on the footing that the show cause notice was invalid because Rule 10A was ultra vires and the notice was time-barred could be sustained.

Analysis: The earlier basis of the trial court's decree no longer survived once the Supreme Court had held Rule 10A to be intra vires. In that situation, action under Rule 10A was legally available. The question of limitation also could not be upheld on the same footing, because the validity and service of the notice had to be examined in the changed legal setting and in the light of the earlier proceedings.

Conclusion: The finding that the notice was illegal and barred by limitation could not stand.

Issue (ii): Whether the writ petition and suit should be entertained to grant final relief when the assessee had an effective statutory remedy before the excise authority.

Analysis: Though alternative remedy does not by itself bar a suit or writ petition, courts ordinarily insist on exhaustion of internal remedies, especially where the authority is yet to complete the enquiry and the assessee can raise all objections before it. The prior writ proceedings had been treated as infructuous and the parties were intended to proceed on the show cause notice itself. In the circumstances, the proper course was to restore the matter to the statutory forum and require the assessee to answer the notice and to permit inspection and hearing.

Conclusion: The matter was not to be finally adjudicated in the suit or writ petition, and the parties were relegated to the statutory proceedings.

Final Conclusion: The decree of the trial court was interfered with, the assessee was directed to respond to the show cause notice before the excise authority, and the dispute was left to be decided in the statutory process rather than by final civil or writ adjudication.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory notice and ensuing excise proceedings remain pending, and the challenged rule is held valid, the court may decline final civil or writ relief and require the assessee to pursue the statutory remedy, with all objections left open before the competent authority.

---