https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102601 The Special Director was competent to issue the show-cause notice as an adjudicating officer under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, because the notice sought adjudication under section 51 and determination of penalty under section 50, while the relevant rules and notified authorisation covered officers empowered to adjudicate such cases. The writ petition challenging the notice at the threshold was not maintainable, since the challenge was directed only at a notice calling for explanation and no final adjudication had yet been made; interference at that stage was premature under the ordinary rule against pre-decisional writ review. The challenge therefore failed and the petition was dismissed without admission. en-us Wed, 22 Jun 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:07:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102601 The Special Director was competent to issue the show-cause notice as an adjudicating officer under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, because the notice sought adjudication under section 51 and determination of penalty under section 50, while the relevant rules and notified authorisation covered officers empowered to adjudicate such cases. The writ petition challenging the notice at the threshold was not maintainable, since the challenge was directed only at a notice calling for explanation and no final adjudication had yet been made; interference at that stage was premature under the ordinary rule against pre-decisional writ review. The challenge therefore failed and the petition was dismissed without admission. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 22 Jun 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102601