https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157784 Exemption proceedings under section 13B of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act and rule 28A were treated as quasi-judicial, so a screening committee could not reject an application on adverse inspection material without first giving the unit a hearing. The rejection was therefore invalid for breach of natural justice and had to be set aside. On limitation, the appeal period under rule 28A(5)(f) commenced only on proved communication of the lower committee's decision; a bare assertion of dispatch was insufficient. The appeal was not time-barred. Both committee orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the applicant. en-us Thu, 12 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Oct 2013 16:20:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157784 Exemption proceedings under section 13B of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act and rule 28A were treated as quasi-judicial, so a screening committee could not reject an application on adverse inspection material without first giving the unit a hearing. The rejection was therefore invalid for breach of natural justice and had to be set aside. On limitation, the appeal period under rule 28A(5)(f) commenced only on proved communication of the lower committee's decision; a bare assertion of dispatch was insufficient. The appeal was not time-barred. Both committee orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the applicant. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 12 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157784