https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162325 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 and Section 103 was upheld because part of the cause of action arose in Jammu and Kashmir, where the goods were situated and delivery and lifting were integral to the contract. The arbitration clause did not bar writ jurisdiction since the challenge concerned statutory tax liability and levy without authority of law. The sale was held to be local, not inter-State, because the contract required delivery and lifting at site on an as-is-where-is basis, excluded interstate transport, and any later movement occurred only after sale completion at the purchaser's discretion. The Leh lots did not qualify for exemption because the notification's licensing and documentation conditions were not met. en-us Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Feb 2014 17:59:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162325 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 and Section 103 was upheld because part of the cause of action arose in Jammu and Kashmir, where the goods were situated and delivery and lifting were integral to the contract. The arbitration clause did not bar writ jurisdiction since the challenge concerned statutory tax liability and levy without authority of law. The sale was held to be local, not inter-State, because the contract required delivery and lifting at site on an as-is-where-is basis, excluded interstate transport, and any later movement occurred only after sale completion at the purchaser's discretion. The Leh lots did not qualify for exemption because the notification's licensing and documentation conditions were not met. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162325