Bombay High Court quashes cancellation of DTA sale permission, orders fair hearing to petitioner

The High Court of Bombay set aside the impugned order where respondent No.2 canceled DTA sale permission without notice or hearing to the petitioner. The Court directed respondent to hear the petitioner before making any decision regarding the permission within three months, issue a reasoned order, and communicate it to the petitioner. The decision would not impact ongoing proceedings. The Writ Petition was disposed of with these directions, and the rule was made absolute with no order as to costs.

---

---

Issues involved: Cancellation of DTA sale permission without notice or hearing to the petitioner.

Summary:
The High Court of Bombay, in the case, addressed the issue of the impugned order dated 18.12.2008, where the respondent No.2 canceled the DTA sale permission without providing any notice or hearing to the petitioner. The Court emphasized the importance of reasons for withdrawing the earlier permission, citing precedents like Amitex Silk Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat and Ginni International Ltd. vs. Commissioner. The Court held that the respondent should have heard the petitioner before canceling the permission granted. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order and directed the respondent to hear the petitioner before making any decision regarding the permission within three months. The respondent was instructed to issue a reasoned order and communicate it to the petitioner, clarifying that the decision would not impact any other ongoing proceedings. The Writ Petition was disposed of with the above directions, and the rule was made absolute with no order as to costs.

---