TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the High Court should interfere at the stage of the impugned show cause notices on the ground of lack of jurisdiction in the issuing authority and on the plea that the notices were barred by limitation.
Analysis: The challenge to the notices was examined in the context of the limited scope of interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The notices had been issued under the statutory regime governing service tax and GST, and the Court considered the notifications and circulars placing officers of the Directorate General of GST Intelligence within the framework of Central Excise Officers and prescribing the scheme for issuance and adjudication of notices. On that basis, the Court found no jurisdictional defect in the issuance of the notices by the 2nd respondent, leaving adjudication to the jurisdictional authority as provided by the statutory and administrative framework. The plea on limitation was treated as one involving mixed questions of fact and law requiring a reply to the notices and adjudication by the competent authority, rather than interference at the threshold.
Conclusion: The High Court declined to quash the show cause notices and held that the proceedings could continue before the competent authority.
TaxTMI 
