https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42765 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 was upheld because the petitioner's business and office were within the court's limits and part of the cause of action arose there; availability of an appeal under the Customs Act did not bar writ relief. A public notice could not override an Open General Licence or extinguish import rights already attached to the contract and licence, so the import entitlement was protected. After the earlier adjudication, the customs authority became functus officio, making the fresh show-cause notice and personal penalty order without jurisdiction. The confiscation and re-export conditions were also found arbitrary and inconsistent with Article 14 because similarly placed importers had been treated differently. en-us Wed, 19 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:28:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42765 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 was upheld because the petitioner's business and office were within the court's limits and part of the cause of action arose there; availability of an appeal under the Customs Act did not bar writ relief. A public notice could not override an Open General Licence or extinguish import rights already attached to the contract and licence, so the import entitlement was protected. After the earlier adjudication, the customs authority became functus officio, making the fresh show-cause notice and personal penalty order without jurisdiction. The confiscation and re-export conditions were also found arbitrary and inconsistent with Article 14 because similarly placed importers had been treated differently. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 19 Apr 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42765