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 refusal of renewal of a gold dealer licence on the ground of low turnover was sustainable when the applicant's explanation of illness and other circumstances had not been considered under the proviso in Explanation (I) to Rule 3(ee) of the Gold Control (Licensing of Dealers) Rules, 1969.
Analysis: Explanation (I) to Rule 3(ee) deems turnover to be too low when it is on the average not more than fifty grammes per month, but it also permits grant of licence if the applicant satisfies the Administrator that there are sufficient reasons for an average monthly turnover below that level. The applicant's plea that illness and disability affected the business was a relevant circumstance going to the existence of sufficient reasons. The appellate and revisional authorities did not properly address this explanation or record findings on it, showing that the statutory requirement had not been considered in the manner required.
Conclusion: The refusal orders could not stand. The matter was required to be reconsidered afresh by the appellate authority after examining the applicant's explanation under Explanation (I) to Rule 3(ee).
Ratio Decidendi: Where the governing rule permits renewal despite low turnover on proof of sufficient reasons, the authority must consider and decide the applicant's explanation on that question before refusing the licence.