1. This is an application for reference in terms of Section 35H of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (in short, 'the Act').
2. When the matter was placed for admission, we pointed out to learned counsel for the petitioner that this High Court does not have jurisdiction to deal with the matter, in view of the decision of this Court in Seth Banarsi Dass Gupta v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [1978 (113) ITR 817]. In the said case, white dealing with the scope of entertaining reference under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the I.T Act'), it was observed that this High Court, that the State within whose territorial jurisdiction original adjudicating authority functions would have jurisdiction to deal with the reference under the concerned Statute. The view was again reiterated in Suresh Desai and Associates v. Commissioner of Income Tax . That was also a case under Section 256(2) of the I.T. Act. In a petition for reference arising under the Act in Central Excise Case No. 5 of 1997 (Commissioner of Central Excise v. Technological Institute of Textile decided on 9-11-1998, it was held that the High Court within whose jurisdiction adjudicating authority functions would have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the matter. We have also expressed similar view in Central Excise Act Case No. 7 of 2000 disposed of on 30-10-2000 taking note of decision of the Apex Court in Stridewell Leather (P) Ltd. v. Bhankerpur Simbhaoli Beverages (P) Ltd. , while dealing with the scope of expression "the High Court" under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 (in short, the Companies Act').
3. We find no substance in the plea of learned counsel for petitioner that site of the Commissionerate or appellate authority determines the jurisdiction in view of what has been stated in the aforesaid decision.
4. In view of the aforesaid decisions, the inevitable conclusion is that this Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain the petition.