TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 316
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n or any other appropriate writ, direction or order completely and permanently prohibiting the Respondents herein from taking any action against the Petitioner pursuant to proceeding of Show Cause Notice File No. STC/15-36/O&A/2020 dated 28.09.2020. (B) That Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside Show Cause Notice File No. STC/15-36/O&A/2020 dated 28.09.2020. (C) Pending hearing and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordship may be pleased to stay further proceedings of Show Cause Notice File No. STC/15-36/ O&A/2020 dated 28.09.2020. (D) An ex-parte ad-interim relief in terms of para 17(C) above may be kindly be granted. (E) Any other further relief as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also please be granted." 4. Brief facts of the case are as under:- 4.1 The petitioner is working in construction project such as clearing ground for foundations and fabricating steel sheds using pipes, poles & iron sheets as well as gates & railing. During the course of their business, the petitioner has been fabricating an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... [5] It was also pointed out by learned advocates for both the sides that the matter is also sub-judice before the Hon'ble Supreme Court with regard to the issue of limitation if the impugned show cause notice is quashed and set aside by this Court. [6] Considering the above submissions, the respondent authorities are directed to undergo the process of pre-consultation keeping the impugned show cause notice in abeyance on record before the next date of hearing. Such exercise shall be completed within four weeks. [7] Stand over to 18th April 2024" 6. On 18.04.2024, time was sought on behalf of the respondent stating that the hearing of pre notice consultation is fixed on 23rd April, 2024. Therefore, the matter was adjourned today i.e. on 26th June 2024. 7. Learned advocate Mr. Paresh Dave for the petitioner submitted that the respondent authorities have conducted the pre notice consultation on 23.04.2024 and the petitioner has filed a detailed submission pursuant to such notice. 8. Learned advocate Mr. Nikunt R. Raval for the respondent submitted upon instructions that respondents have not passed any order on pre-notice consultation because the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... notice." 8. In view of the afore-stated Circular, it is clear that the Board had made issuance of preshow-cause notice consultation mandatory for the Principal Commissioner/ Commissioner prior to the issuance of show-cause notice in cases involving the demands of duty above Rs. 50 lac and that such consultation was to be done by the adjudicating authority with the assessee as an important step towards the trade facilitation and for promoting necessary compliance, as also to reduce the necessity of issuing show-cause notice. Despite such mandatory requirement of the pre-show-cause notice consultation at the instance of the respondent authority, in utter disregard of the said mandate, and without considering the laudable object behind issuing such circular, the respondents issued the impugned pre-show-cause notice consultation dated 12.4.2019 delivering the same to the petitioner assessee at 13.55 hours and calling upon them to remain present before the respondent No. 2 at 16.00 hours. The petitioners having requested for reasonable time for the effective consultation, without considering the said request, the respondent No. 2 issued the show-cause notice on the same day i.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y concerned it should not be left with the only option of quashing it and putting the party at an advantage even though it may be satisfied that on the material before him the conclusion arrived at by the Income-tax Officer was correct or dismissing the petition because otherwise the party would get unfair advantage. The power to quash an order under Article 226 can be exercised not merely when the order sought to be quashed is one made without jurisdiction in which case there can be no room for the same authority to be directed to deal with it. But in the circumstances of a case the Court might take the view that another authority has the jurisdiction to deal with the matter and may direct that authority to deal with it or where the order of the authority which has the jurisdiction is vitiated by circumstances like failure to observe the principles of natural justice the Court may quash the order and direct the authority to dispose of the matter afresh after giving the aggrieved party a reasonable opportunity of putting forward its case. Otherwise, it would mean that where a Court quashes an order because the principles of natural justice have not been complied with it should not ....