TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (9) TMI 1203
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nch of the Tribunal by a communication dated 10 October, 2017 sent by the office of the Principal Bench. The Appellant, however, filed Writ Petition(C) 10959 of 2017 of 2017 before the Delhi High Court against the sending of the papers to the Chandigarh Regional Bench by the office of the Principal Bench of the Tribunal. In view of the statement made on behalf of the respondent- Tribunal before the Delhi High Court that the question whether the appeal would be heard by the Principal Bench at New Delhi or any other Regional Bench would be decided on the judicial side, the writ petition was disposed by the Delhi High Court. 2. Pursuant to the order passed by the Delhi High Court, a communication was sent by the office of the Principal Benc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w cause notice was issued on 24 October, 2013 by the Commissioner of Service Tax at New Delhi to the Appellant, whose address is Galaxy Towers, Part-II, Sector-15, Gurgaon but, after the restructuring of the Service Tax Commissionerate, the Appellant fell under the jurisdiction of Service Tax Commissionerate at Gurgaon in terms of Trade Notice No. 02/2014 dated 1 October, 2014. The show cause notice was, therefore, ultimately adjudicated upon by an order dated 28 February, 2017 passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax at Gurgaon. It is, therefore, his submission that when the Appellant is situated at Gurgaon and the order was also passed by the Commissioner of Service Tax at Gurgaon, the Regional Bench of the Tribunal at Chandigarh would a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the jurisdiction of Principal Bench at New Delhi. However, by a notification dated 1 November, 2013 that was published in the Government of India Gazette dated 2 November, 2013, the Central Government notified the creation of six additional Benches of the Tribunal, including three at the existing locations at New Delhi, Mumbai and Chennai and three new Benches at Chandigarh, Allahabad and Hyderabad with effect from the date the Notification was published in the Gazette. The Government of India, Ministry of Finance by letter dated 13 November, 2013 also specified the location and jurisdiction of the proposed new Benches. In respect of the Bench at Chandigarh, it was provided that the jurisdiction of the Bench at Chandigarh was carved out f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, the issue was regarding determination of the High Court before which Appeals would lie under Section 35G (1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 [the Act]. The Appellant carried business at Lucknow and the matter was ultimately decided by the Tribunal at New Delhi since the Tribunal at New Delhi exercised jurisdiction in respect of cases arising within the territorial limits of Uttar Pradesh, National Territory of Delhi and the States of Maharashtra. Having regard to the situs of the Tribunal, an appeal in terms of Section 35F of the Act was filed before the Delhi High Court. The Delhi High Court, however, held that it had no territorial jurisdiction in the matter. It is in this context that the Supreme Court held: "12. The said dec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....side its territorial jurisdiction, some sort of judicial anarchy shall come into play. An assessee, affected by an order of assessment made at Bombay may invoke the jurisdiction of the Allahabad High Court to take advantage of the law laid down by it and which might suit him and thus he would be able to successfully evade the law laid down by the High Court at Bombay. 14. Furthermore, when an appeal is provided under a stature, Parliament must have thought of one High Court. It is a different matter that by way of necessity, a Tribunal may have to exercise jurisdiction over several States but it does not appeal to any reason that Parliament intended, despite providing for an appeal before the High Court, that appeals may be filed b....