201604.28
0
0

Writ Is A Remedy For Demand Beyond Jurisdiction & Time Barred SCN

In Madura Coats Limited Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise, decided on March 9, 2016,  2016 (4) TMI 980 - The Honourable Madras High Court while disposing W. P. Nos. 2782 and 2783 of 2002 held that 

The Writ Court should not interfere at the stage of issuance of show cause notices by the authorities for the reason that the authorities should provide an ample opportunity to put forth their contentions before the authorities concerned and to satisfy the authorities about the absence of case for proceeding against the persons against whom the show cause notices have been issued.


Where a show cause notice is issued either without jurisdiction or in an abuse of process of law, in that case, the writ Court can interfere even at the stage of issuance of show cause notice. It should be prima-facie established to be so.

Relied upon

The ratio as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India and another vs. Vicco Laboratories ,reported in (2007) 13 SCC 270, wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as follows:-

30. Normally, the writ court should not interfere at the stage of issuance of show cause notice by the author. In such a case, the parties get ample opportunity to put forth their contentions before the authorities concerned and to satisfy the authorities concerned about the absence of case for proceeding against the person against whom the show-cause notices have been issued. Abstinence from interference at the stage of issuance of show cause notice in order to relegate the parties to the proceedings before the authorities concerned is the normal rule. However, the said rule is not without exceptions. Where a show cause notice is issued either without jurisdiction or in an abuse of process of law, certainly, in that case, the writ court would not hesitate to interfere even at the stage of issuance of show cause notice. The interference at the show cause notice stage should be rare and not in a routine manner. Mere assertion by the writ petitioner that notice was without jurisdiction and/or abuse of process of law would not suffice. It should be prima facie established to be so. Where factual adjudication would be necessary, interference is ruled out".

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Current day month ye@r *