https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43616 Availability of an alternate remedy does not by itself bar writ jurisdiction under Article 226, but interference at the show cause notice stage is justified only where the notice is shown on admitted facts to be without jurisdiction or otherwise legally unsustainable. A mistaken departmental interpretation of a notification, without more, does not establish lack of jurisdiction. In the absence of material showing that the notice was founded on extraneous considerations, arbitrariness, or any jurisdictional defect, no ground exists for quashing it in writ proceedings. The impugned show cause notice was therefore not without jurisdiction and did not warrant interference. en-us Tue, 22 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Jun 2010 10:47:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43616 Availability of an alternate remedy does not by itself bar writ jurisdiction under Article 226, but interference at the show cause notice stage is justified only where the notice is shown on admitted facts to be without jurisdiction or otherwise legally unsustainable. A mistaken departmental interpretation of a notification, without more, does not establish lack of jurisdiction. In the absence of material showing that the notice was founded on extraneous considerations, arbitrariness, or any jurisdictional defect, no ground exists for quashing it in writ proceedings. The impugned show cause notice was therefore not without jurisdiction and did not warrant interference. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43616