https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43232 A writ petition challenging a show cause notice was held not maintainable where the excise statute provided a complete adjudicatory and appellate framework, so the assessee was required to pursue statutory remedies first. The Court further found that a limitation objection did not, by itself, establish absence of jurisdiction because invocation of the extended period depended on disputed factual questions such as suppression, fraud, or wilful misstatement, which had to be examined by the departmental authorities in the first instance. The challenge to the notice therefore failed at the threshold and the parties were left to the statutory proceedings. en-us Tue, 29 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:38:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43232 A writ petition challenging a show cause notice was held not maintainable where the excise statute provided a complete adjudicatory and appellate framework, so the assessee was required to pursue statutory remedies first. The Court further found that a limitation objection did not, by itself, establish absence of jurisdiction because invocation of the extended period depended on disputed factual questions such as suppression, fraud, or wilful misstatement, which had to be examined by the departmental authorities in the first instance. The challenge to the notice therefore failed at the threshold and the parties were left to the statutory proceedings. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 29 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43232