https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102026 The High Court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction over a notice of attachment issued under Customs Rules as the events occurred outside its territorial jurisdiction. Despite arguments invoking Art. 226 and Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, the Court emphasized that the location of the Tribunal's order does not establish jurisdiction. Applying the non-obstante clause under Article 226(2), the Court dismissed the applications and writ petition, vacating interim orders and declining to award costs. The judgment underscores the importance of the cause of action's location in determining High Court jurisdiction in customs-related matters. en-us Wed, 13 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:11:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102026 The High Court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction over a notice of attachment issued under Customs Rules as the events occurred outside its territorial jurisdiction. Despite arguments invoking Art. 226 and Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, the Court emphasized that the location of the Tribunal's order does not establish jurisdiction. Applying the non-obstante clause under Article 226(2), the Court dismissed the applications and writ petition, vacating interim orders and declining to award costs. The judgment underscores the importance of the cause of action's location in determining High Court jurisdiction in customs-related matters. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 13 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102026