Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT : High Court has jurisdiction if consequences of demand are felt within its territory; non-existent or unserved demands are unsustainable.

29. Capgemini Technology Services India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT: (2026) 488 ITR 292 (Bom): 2026 SCC OnLine Bom 3755: (2026) 350 CTR 719 (Bom)

Date of order 24th March 2026

Article 226 of Constitution of India

Recovery of tax — Writ jurisdiction of High Court under Art. 226 — Territorial jurisdiction of Court:— (A) Power of High Court to issue writ to authority not within its territorial jurisdiction of Court provided cause of action wholly or in part arises within its jurisdiction; (B) Doctrine of forum conveniens and “cause of action” — Court has to consider each matter on appreciation of facts involved therein; (C) Recovery of tax — Notice of demand — Amalgamation of erstwhile company with assessee — Recovery notice issued in the name of erstwhile company originating from Delhi but received by assessee in Pune — Recovery notice and demands having direct impact on assessee in Pune and consequences of recovery notice and demand would be felt in Pune — Transfer of case from Delhi to Pune — Officer who was to defend case and deal with recovery of demand in Pune — Right officer to writ could be issued? — Held by High Court that part of cause of action clearly arising within territorial jurisdiction of Bombay High Court — Writ petition is maintainable before B