<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (8) TMI 540 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207569</link>
    <description>Territorial jurisdiction for statutory appeals under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 depends on more than the situs of the Tribunal. The Court applied territorial jurisdiction principles and the forum conveniens doctrine, holding that the location of the appellate forum is not by itself determinative and that the High Court must consider where the cause of action arose and whether another forum is more appropriate. As the adjudication, original proceedings, and dispute all arose in Himachal Pradesh, the Delhi High Court held that the Tribunal&#039;s presence in New Delhi did not confer jurisdiction and accepted the preliminary objection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 12:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181046" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (8) TMI 540 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207569</link>
      <description>Territorial jurisdiction for statutory appeals under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 depends on more than the situs of the Tribunal. The Court applied territorial jurisdiction principles and the forum conveniens doctrine, holding that the location of the appellate forum is not by itself determinative and that the High Court must consider where the cause of action arose and whether another forum is more appropriate. As the adjudication, original proceedings, and dispute all arose in Himachal Pradesh, the Delhi High Court held that the Tribunal&#039;s presence in New Delhi did not confer jurisdiction and accepted the preliminary objection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207569</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>