Pre-decided show cause notice can be challenged in writ jurisdiction when liability is already concluded and only quantification remains.

A writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable against a notice styled as a show cause notice where the authority has already reached a concluded view on liability and only quantification remains. In substance, such a notice is not a genuine show cause notice, so the usual restraint against writ interference at the notice stage does not apply. The existence of the jurisdictional fact was therefore open to judicial examination in writ jurisdiction, and the High Court ought not to have declined interference.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against a notice styled as a show cause notice when the authority has already formed a concluded view on liability to cess.

Analysis: Although writ courts ordinarily do not interfere at the stage of a show cause notice, that restraint does not apply where the notice is issued with a pre-decided mind and the authority has already determined the liability, leaving only quantification. In such a situation, a further hearing would serve no meaningful purpose and the notice is not a true show cause notice in substance. The existence of a jurisdictional fact was therefore open to examination in writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The writ petition was maintainable and the High Court ought not to have declined interference.

Ratio Decidendi: A notice that reflects a pre-formed conclusion on liability is not a genuine show cause notice, and a writ court may interfere where the authority has already determined the substantive issue and only quantification remains.

---