TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court quashes cancellation order for lack of procedural fairness</h1> The Court allowed the petition, quashing the cancellation order dated 30th January 1968 under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. The Court found the ... - Issues:1. Cancellation of registration certificate under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948.2. Allegations of business closure and misuse of registration certificates.3. Violation of principles of natural justice in the cancellation process.4. Mention of additional registration certificate in the cancellation order.5. Availability of appeal and revision remedies.Detailed Analysis:The petitioner, a dealer registered under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948, faced allegations of business closure and misuse of registration certificates. The Assessing Authority issued multiple notices over the years, culminating in the cancellation of the registration certificate No. AMR-IV-11753. The Authority cited reasons such as the absence of genuine sale and purchase transactions, leading to misuse of the certificate. However, the cancellation order did not address the registration certificate under the Central Sales Tax Act, creating a discrepancy.The petitioner contended that the cancellation order violated the principles of natural justice as the material collected by the Authority was not disclosed or rebutted during the proceedings. Citing legal precedents emphasizing the right to be heard and defend against allegations, the petitioner argued for the cancellation of the order based on procedural irregularities. Additionally, the petitioner raised concerns about the communication error in mentioning the cancellation of an additional registration certificate not covered in the original order.In response, the respondent argued that the petitioner had recourse to appeal and revision mechanisms under the Act, which were not utilized. Despite this, the Court found that the cancellation order lacked adherence to natural justice principles, rendering it jurisdictionally flawed. Consequently, the Court allowed the petition, quashing the cancellation order dated 30th January 1968. The Court highlighted the importance of procedural fairness and directed the Assessing Authority to proceed lawfully while considering the observations made in the judgment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
