https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74148 A Bombay High Court note explains that territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 can arise where an impugned order, though passed outside Bombay, directly affects business carried on in Bombay. It also states that a review application under the Handbook depends on the statute or scheme: the term "person aggrieved" is confined to one whose legal rights are affected, and review power conferred on the Chief Controller cannot be exercised by an unauthorised delegate. The note further emphasises that review is limited to recognised review grounds and cannot be used to reappreciate evidence or substitute a fresh merits-based decision for the earlier order. en-us Wed, 12 Oct 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74148 A Bombay High Court note explains that territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 can arise where an impugned order, though passed outside Bombay, directly affects business carried on in Bombay. It also states that a review application under the Handbook depends on the statute or scheme: the term "person aggrieved" is confined to one whose legal rights are affected, and review power conferred on the Chief Controller cannot be exercised by an unauthorised delegate. The note further emphasises that review is limited to recognised review grounds and cannot be used to reappreciate evidence or substitute a fresh merits-based decision for the earlier order. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 Oct 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74148