Limitation for demand notice as jurisdictional can void adjudication and permit writ relief despite alternative remedy.

Timely issuance of a demand-cum-show cause notice under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 was treated as a condition precedent to jurisdiction, not a mere procedural requirement. Because the notice for the 2016-2017 period was issued on 11.04.2022, it was time-barred; the adjudication founded on that notice therefore lacked foundational jurisdiction and could not stand. The Court also noted that the availability of an appellate remedy did not bar writ relief where the proceedings were wholly without jurisdiction, so the impugned adjudication was liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a demand-cum-show cause notice issued beyond the period prescribed under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 could sustain the ensuing adjudication, and whether the availability of an appellate remedy under the CGST Act barred recourse to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The limitation prescribed for issuance of notice under Section 73(1) was treated as a condition precedent to the exercise of power and not as a mere procedural timeline. On the facts, the notice related to the financial year 2016-2017 but was issued on 11.04.2022, beyond the statutory period. The Court held that, once the notice was time-barred, the proceedings founded on it lacked foundational jurisdiction and the adjudicating order based on such notice could not stand. The availability of an alternative remedy did not preclude writ interference because the case fell within the established exception where the proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The notice was held to be barred by limitation, the consequent proceedings were held to be without jurisdiction, and the adjudicating order was held liable to be set aside.

Final Conclusion: The writ court interfered because the initiation itself was jurisdictionally invalid, and the impugned adjudication was quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute makes timely issuance of a demand notice a condition for the assumption of jurisdiction, a notice issued beyond the prescribed period is without jurisdiction, and the rule of alternative remedy does not bar writ relief against the resulting void proceedings.

---