TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 750X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... insertion of clause (1A), no new jurisdiction was conferred on the High Court but, it provided an additional ground and extended the jurisdiction beyond the boundaries of the State if the cause of action arose within its territory. The consignments were received by the writ petitioner at Delhi air cargo complex. They were cleared by the authorities at Delhi, after obtaining clarification from the Board of Customs. The consignments were cleared for home consumption upon acceptance of the duties as mentioned in the said notification without any demur. The writ petitioner dispatched those gold dore bars to Uttarakhand. The shipments were refined and the refined gold bars were brought back from Uttarakhand to Bengaluru for sale and manufacture of gold jewellery. - The jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be invoked if even a fraction of the cause of action arises within the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court. Against the aforesaid background, it is difficult to uphold the view taken by the Hon'ble Judge that this court had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition - Decided in favour of appellant. - Writ Appeal No. 1482 of 2015 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 318 71 Gold dore bar, having gold content not exceeding 95%. Nil 2% 5 34 d) Condition Nos. 5 and 34 of the said notification are set out herein below: Condition No.5 If the importer follows the procedure set out in the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996. Condition No. 34 If, - (a) the goods are directly shipped from the country in which they were produced and each bar has a weight of 5 kg. or above; (b) the goods are imported in accordance with the packing list issued by the mining company by whom they were produced; (c) the importer produces before the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, an assay certificate issued by the mining company or the laboratory attached to it, giving detailed precious metal content in the dore bar; (d) the gold dore bars are imported by the actual user for the purpose of refining and manufacture of standard gold bars of purity 99.5% and above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing the import shipments. The customs authorities cleared the import shipment for home consumption. (j) The Commissioner of Customs, by notice dated May 29, 2013, inter alia, directed the writ petitioner to submit the packaging list from the mining company in respect of the past imports of gold dore bars from the said Mint in respect of the concluded assessments. (k) The writ petitioner, in the reply, submitted that it would be impossible to submit the packaging list of the mining company for the past imports as the imports had, already, been completed. Moreover, it was submitted that the said Mint was not allowed by the Gold Corporation Act of Australia from revealing any detail of the mining company. (l) In spite of such reply by the writ petitioner, the Commissioner of Customs again issued a notice on June 18, 2003, once again asking the writ petitioner to submit the aforesaid documents. (m) The writ petitioner insisted that the said notification never mandated that the import should be accompanied by the packaging list of the mining company. The writ petitioner maintained that the demand of the authorities for production of packaging list of the mining company wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AND ANOTHER [(2006) 6 SUPREME COURT CASES 207] held that whether or not cause of action wholly or in part for filing an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has arisen within the territorial limits of any High Court has to be decided in light of the nature and character of the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In order to maintain an application, the petitioner has to establish that a legal right claimed by him has, prima facie, either being infringed or is threatened to be infringed by the respondent within the territorial limits of the Court's jurisdiction and such infringement might take place by causing him actual injury or threat thereof. 7. In KUSUM INGOTS AND ALLOY LTD vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER [(2004) 6 SUPREME COURT CASES 254] it was held that keeping in view the expressions used in Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India, indisputedly even if a small fraction of cause of action accrued within the jurisdiction of the High Court, the High Court would have jurisdiction in the matter. 8. In NAVEEN CHANDRA N. MAJITHIA vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [(2000) 7 SUPREME COURT CASES 640], the Supreme Court of Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
