Territorial jurisdiction and proof of valid demand orders controlled the writ; non-existent tax recovery was quashed.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....After insertion of Article 226(2), territorial jurisdiction extends to a High Court where part of the cause of action arises. Because the amalgamated petitioner was at Pune, the recovery notice was received there, the consequences of the impugned demands operated there, and the case had been transferred under Section 127 to the Pune officer, the writ petition was maintainable in Bombay; the Delhi officer was functus officio and effective relief could be granted only in Pune. On merits, the Revenue failed to produce any assessment, rectification, intimation, or service record supporting the demands, so an adverse inference arose and recovery of the non-existent demands was impermissible. The demands, recovery notice, and computation sheets were quashed.....