Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether cancellation of VAT registration granted to the dealer could be sustained when the authority passed the order without hearing the dealer and without communicating the grounds for proposed cancellation, and whether such registration could be cancelled otherwise than in accordance with section 27 of the Act.
Analysis: The registration was treated as having moved from a provisional stage to a final registration. In that situation, cancellation could be made only on the grounds contemplated by section 27 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003. Even where cancellation is sought on a permissible ground, including conviction of the dealer for an offence under the Act or the earlier law, the Commissioner must give an opportunity of hearing and record reasons in support of the decision. The impugned order was passed without hearing the petitioner and without disclosing the basis on which cancellation ab initio was proposed. The alternative reliance on the rules did not cure the absence of compliance with these mandatory requirements.
Conclusion: The cancellation order could not be sustained and was quashed. The respondents were, however, left free to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after following the required procedure.