https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155996 In statutory excise contracts for liquor trade, cancellation of a licence, reauction of the shops, and a consequential demand were treated as valid where notice proposing cancellation was served, an opportunity of hearing was given, and the reauction notification was publicly communicated. The Court held that such procedural requirements should not be examined hypertechnically and that substantial compliance with a directory requirement is sufficient when no prejudice is shown. It also accepted that the opportunity under Section 31(1-A) must be judged realistically in light of repeated default and the monthly payment structure. The challenge to the reauction on the ground of limited bidding was rejected, and the objection to forfeiture of advance or security deposit was not entertained because it had not been raised below. en-us Thu, 08 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Mar 2019 14:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155996 In statutory excise contracts for liquor trade, cancellation of a licence, reauction of the shops, and a consequential demand were treated as valid where notice proposing cancellation was served, an opportunity of hearing was given, and the reauction notification was publicly communicated. The Court held that such procedural requirements should not be examined hypertechnically and that substantial compliance with a directory requirement is sufficient when no prejudice is shown. It also accepted that the opportunity under Section 31(1-A) must be judged realistically in light of repeated default and the monthly payment structure. The challenge to the reauction on the ground of limited bidding was rejected, and the objection to forfeiture of advance or security deposit was not entertained because it had not been raised below. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 08 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155996