Antony Dominic, J. 1. This appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P(C).
12021/14, aggrieved by the judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition.
2. Briefly stated, case of the appellant is that it remitted an amount of `41,00,129/- towards service tax during the period from 2010 to 2013. On the basis that the amount was not payable, it made Ext.P1 refund claim. On receipt of the claim, respondents issued Ext.P2, calling upon the appellant to show cause why the amount shall not be refunded and also adjusted towards its liability, if any. It was at that stage, the writ petition was filed, challenging Ext.P2 show cause notice. Learned single Judge, by the impugned judgment, dismissed the writ petition relegating the appellant to pursue the matter before the adjudicatory forum. It is this judgment which is under challenge before us.
3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned standing counsel for the respondents.
WA.1252/14 2
4. We have gone through the statement filed by the respondents justifying the show cause notice. The show cause notice can be challenged in a writ petition if it is issued without jurisdiction and if it is ex facie untenable. A reading of the statement filed by the department itself shows that according to them, there are grounds to inter that the case involves issues of unjust enrichment, liability for tax and also time bar. All these are issues require adjudication of factual issues, which is incapable of resolution in a proceedings under article 226 of the Constitution of India. That apart, it cannot also be contended that the statutory authority which issued the show cause notice has acted beyond their jurisdiction. Such being the case, we do not think that the learned single Judge was not justified in declining his jurisdiction.
Writ appeal fails. It is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge.
kkb.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, Judge.
/True copy/ PS to Judge