Kerala HC Issues Notice to Digi Yatra Foundation in PIL Seeking Strict Compliance with DPDP Act 2023 for Airport Passenger Data: High Court of Kerala
07 Mar 2026
Appointment to Higher Post on Compassionate Grounds Not a Matter of Right: J&K&L High Court
07 Mar 2026
Nearly Decade-Long Delay in Patnitop Illegal Construction PIL Appalls J&K&L High Court; Directs PDA CEO to Join Proceedings
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Employees Under CCS Pension Rules Excluded from PG Act Section 2(e) Gratuity: Delhi HC Upholds Forfeiture on Resignation
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
CJI Kant: Action Needed for More Women Judges
10 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
M. S. SONAK, JITENDRA JAIN
Prakash Raghunath Autade – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The challenge in this petition is to the show cause notice dated 5 April 2024 (Exhibit ‘A’) issued by the 4th respondent to the petitioner.
3. Mr. Hidayatullah, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner, submitted that the show cause notice is based mainly on the statements referred to at Serial Nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 13, 14 and 15 of paragraphs 12 of the impugned Show Cause Notice-cum-Demand Notice. He submitted that the above statements were mainly recorded in 2018-19 in the context of the Pre-GST regime. He submitted that, in any event, all the statements were not recorded during an enquiry or proceeding, either in the Central Goods and Service Tax Act or the Pre-CGST regime. He referred to the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the petitioner’s case decided on 3 December 2021 in Prakash Raghunath Autade Vs. Union of India, 2022 (380) E.L.T. 264 (Bom.) to submit that any statements recorded before the issue of any show cause notice cannot be regarded as those recorded during an enquiry or proceedings
Writ petitions against show cause notices are only entertained in cases of jurisdictional issues or violations of fundamental rights; otherwise, parties must respond to the notice and raise defenses.
Adherence to the show cause notice is a fundamental safeguard against arbitrary exercises of power, ensuring that authority remains tethered to the principles of justice and the rule of law.
Inordinate and unexplained delay in adjudication of show cause notices under the Customs Act warrants quashing of such notices.
A show-cause notice does not constitute an infringement of rights, and a writ petition against it is typically premature unless jurisdictional issues are present.
The court established that pre-show cause notice consultation is mandatory for demands exceeding Rs.50 lakhs, and failure to comply renders the notice invalid.
A show-cause notice must specify charges clearly to ensure fairness in quasi-judicial proceedings; vagueness renders the proceedings invalid.
The court established that under GST Rules, there is no obligation to provide a hearing before issuing a show cause notice, as the communication is discretionary.
The jurisdiction of CAG is limited to government departments, and show cause notices based on its audit findings are valid unless issued improperly.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article