Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the writ petitions challenging the show cause notices were liable to be entertained at the threshold or whether the petitioner should be relegated to reply before the adjudicating officer.
Analysis: The notices were issued by the proper officer after search and seizure proceedings during investigation. The objections based on alleged non-compliance with the statutory scrutiny procedure, absence of adequate opportunity, and the validity of the proposed demand were matters that could be raised in reply before the adjudicating officer. In these circumstances, and in view of the earlier course adopted in connected proceedings, no ground was made out to interfere at the show cause notice stage.
Conclusion: The challenge to the show cause notices was not entertained and the petitioner was relegated to raise all available factual and legal grounds before the adjudicating officer.
Final Conclusion: The writ petitions failed at the threshold and the petitioner was left to pursue the statutory adjudication process in response to the impugned notices.
Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition will ordinarily not be entertained against a show cause notice issued in the course of statutory investigation where the objections can be effectively raised before the adjudicating authority.