https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237292 Where a selected applicant failed to deposit the prescribed licence fee, earnest money and security within time, the governing Rules, 2002 treated the default as cancellation of the selection and resettlement of the shop, with forfeiture only of amounts actually deposited. The court distinguished this from surrender of a licence under Section 36 of the U.P. Excise Act because no regular licence had yet come into existence. The order treating the default as surrender was unsustainable, the demand on that basis was set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration under the Rules after hearing the applicant. en-us Thu, 05 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 10:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237292 Where a selected applicant failed to deposit the prescribed licence fee, earnest money and security within time, the governing Rules, 2002 treated the default as cancellation of the selection and resettlement of the shop, with forfeiture only of amounts actually deposited. The court distinguished this from surrender of a licence under Section 36 of the U.P. Excise Act because no regular licence had yet come into existence. The order treating the default as surrender was unsustainable, the demand on that basis was set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration under the Rules after hearing the applicant. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 05 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237292