Allowing the petition the Court held that ; question was whether the show-cause notice was at all without jurisdiction, whether the respondent wrongly assumed jurisdiction by erroneously deciding jurisdictional facts, whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant at all had any liability in respect of the capital gains in question, and whether the appellant could be said to be an agent under section 163(1)(c) . The High Court had jurisdiction to consider the question in writ proceedings. Court also observed that , no case was made out by the Department that in respect of transfer of shares to a third party, that too outside India, the Indian company could be taxed when the Indian company had no role in the transfer. Merely because those shares related to the Indian company, that would not make the Indian company an agent qua deemed capital gains purportedly earned by the foreign company. The notice was not valid.