https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43542 A writ court should not ordinarily interfere with a show-cause notice issued under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, because the notice is only a proposal to initiate adjudication and no liability is determined at that stage. The power to issue notice extends to cases involving alleged suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, and the authority must decide the duty only after considering the assessee's response. Interference in writ proceedings is justified only where there is an apparent lack of jurisdiction on a pure question of law; where the objection is fact-dependent, the statutory adjudicatory process and alternative remedies should be followed. The notice was held to be within jurisdiction. en-us Tue, 02 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:26:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43542 A writ court should not ordinarily interfere with a show-cause notice issued under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, because the notice is only a proposal to initiate adjudication and no liability is determined at that stage. The power to issue notice extends to cases involving alleged suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, and the authority must decide the duty only after considering the assessee's response. Interference in writ proceedings is justified only where there is an apparent lack of jurisdiction on a pure question of law; where the objection is fact-dependent, the statutory adjudicatory process and alternative remedies should be followed. The notice was held to be within jurisdiction. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43542