<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2003 (1) TMI 672 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161584</link>
    <description>Where a revision is dismissed ex parte for default, restoration should ordinarily be approached liberally so the dispute is decided on merits rather than on non-appearance. The High Court noted that the party had been denied a merits hearing and that the revisional authority could impose costs as a condition for setting aside the default order. It therefore set aside both the dismissal and the refusal to restore, and directed rehearing of the revision on merits after affording an effective opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2014 14:34:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=344550" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (1) TMI 672 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161584</link>
      <description>Where a revision is dismissed ex parte for default, restoration should ordinarily be approached liberally so the dispute is decided on merits rather than on non-appearance. The High Court noted that the party had been denied a merits hearing and that the revisional authority could impose costs as a condition for setting aside the default order. It therefore set aside both the dismissal and the refusal to restore, and directed rehearing of the revision on merits after affording an effective opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161584</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>