" Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.6973 of 2026 Rajendra Kumar Sahoo and Others …. Petitioners Represented by Adv.– Mr. Saswat Kumar Acharya, Advocate -Versus- Addl. Director General (Adjudication) Directorate General of GST, Intelligence, Mumbai …. Opposite Party Represented by Adv.– Mr. Abinash Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel CORAM: HON’ BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No. ORDER 19.03.2026 01. 1. The order-in-original dated 10.12.2025 passed by the opposite party-Additional Director General (Adjudication), Directorate General of GST Intelligence is under challenge in the instant writ petition on the multiple grounds including the effect of the timeline provided under Section 11A(11) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. It is the specific stand of Mr. Saswat Kumar Acharya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that once the timeline has been prescribed in the said provision and if the same expires as no adjudication has been made within the stipulated time, it lapses the proceedings and cannot be revived. According to him, the said provision is pari meteria with Section 73(4B) of the Finance Act, 1994 and the aforesaid issue is subjudice before the Apex Court as well as this Court. He further contends that the show cause notice, which was Printed from counselvise.com Page 2 of 3 issued way back in the year 2018 remained in suspended animation for more than two years, which would be evident from the fact that the notice of hearing fixed by the authorities were issued much thereafter. He further takes a plea of violation of principles of natural justice as repeatedly the petitioners demanded the supply of the show cause notice as well as the requisite relied upon documents but instead of providing such document, the authorities proceeded to pass the impugned order. 3. We would have postponed the hearing of the instant writ petition as the matter relating to Section 73(4B) of the Finance Act, 1994 is pending before the Supreme Court and an observation is made therein that the High Court shall not proceed to the said matter but we find that it involves the other issues and the predominant issue being the violation of principles of natural justice. It appears in course of hearing that the show cause notice was issued upon the petitioners but a plea was taken that because of the change of the place of working by the erstwhile Advocate, the same might have been misplaced somewhere and therefore, the further copy may be served upon him. 4. Such being essentially a question of fact, it may be taken before the appellate forum as we find that the remedy by way of an appeal is under Section 35 of the said Act. All such pleas can be taken by the petitioners and if taken before the authority, there is no fetter on the part of the authority to decide the same on its merit. We are conscious that mere existence of a statutory remedy may not create an absolute bar in entertaining an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India but such power being exercised by the High Court by using its discretion, it may at times refuse to exercise such discretion. It is not a Printed from counselvise.com Page 3 of 3 rule of compulsion that the High Court must entertain such writ petition. 5. In view of the fact, we do not intend to interfere with the impugned order as we find that the petitioner has an adequate, efficacious remedy available under the statute. The writ petition is, thus, dismissed. However, dismissal of the writ petition shall not prevent the petitioners from assailing the selfsame order before the appellate authority under Section 35 of the said Act. In the event, the petitioners choose to challenge the said order in accordance with the said provision, it is open to the authorities to decide all such points taken in the appeal without being influenced by any observations made hereinabove. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) Judge S.K. Jena/Secy. Printed from counselvise.com Digitally Signed Signed by: SANJAY KUMAR JENA Designation: Asst. Registrar-cum-Sr. Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 20-Mar-2026 14:30:32 Signature Not Verified "