Search and seizure challenge left open for the proper forum, so the writ appeals were declined without merits-based interference.

The writ appeals arising from search and seizure proceedings did not warrant further interference because the impugned orders had not finally adjudicated the legality of the search in the manner sought by the appellants and had expressly left them free to challenge the subsequent assessment and demand notices before the appropriate forum. On that basis, the Gauhati HC found no further order necessary in the appeals and declined substantive appellate relief. The appellants retain liberty to pursue their remedies against the later notices in the proper forum, while the writ appeals stand concluded without merits-based interference.

---

---

Issues: Whether any further interference was called for in the writ appeals where the challenge related to search and seizure proceedings and the appellants had been left at liberty to contest the subsequent demand notices before the appropriate forum.

Analysis: The impugned orders recorded that the legality of the search and seizure had not been finally adjudicated in the manner sought by the appellants and that, in relation to the later assessment and demand notices, the appellants were free to pursue the appropriate remedy before the proper forum. In view of that position, no further order was considered necessary in the appeals.

Conclusion: The appeals were not entertained on merits and were dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The order leaves the parties to pursue the challenge to the assessment and demand notices in the appropriate forum, and the writ appeals themselves stand concluded without substantive appellate relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the impugned orders have already preserved the appellant's liberty to seek relief before the appropriate forum, the appellate court may decline further interference in the writ appeals.

---