Justice G.R. Swaminathan noted that the court lacked territorial jurisdiction, as the goods were located in Gujarat, while the petition was filed before the Madurai Bench. The Court then examined Section 54 of the”

“Justice G.R. Swaminathan noted that the court lacked territorial jurisdiction, as the goods were located in Gujarat, while the petition was filed before the Madurai Bench. The Court then examined Section 54 of the”
https://www.taxscan.in/top-stories/merely-passing-through-indian-port-to-another-country-not-amount-to-import-under-section-223-of-customs-act-madras-hc-refuses-to-intervene-in-copper-scrap-transhipment-1435595#:~:text=Justice%20G.R.%20Swaminathan%20noted%20that%20the%20court%20lacked%20territorial%20jurisdiction%2C%20as%20the%20goods%20were%20located%20in%20Gujarat%2C%20while%20the%20petition%20was%20filed%20before%20the%20Madurai%20Bench.%20The%20Court%20then%20examined%20Section%2054%20of%20the