<?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>2006 (5) TMI 453 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162589</link>
    <description>An adverse administrative cancellation order based on an enquiry report and statements recorded behind the contractor&#039;s back could not stand because the relied-upon material was not supplied and no real opportunity was given to meet the allegations or cross-examine the witnesses. The order was also invalid as a non-speaking order, since it merely rejected the reply without meaningful reasons. The Court further noted that the procedure insisted on by the authority, requiring a written option before use of a lower rate or composition mode, was not part of the prescribed process. The order was quashed for breach of natural justice, and the matter was remitted for fresh decision after disclosure of material and hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:39:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348278" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (5) TMI 453 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162589</link>
      <description>An adverse administrative cancellation order based on an enquiry report and statements recorded behind the contractor&#039;s back could not stand because the relied-upon material was not supplied and no real opportunity was given to meet the allegations or cross-examine the witnesses. The order was also invalid as a non-speaking order, since it merely rejected the reply without meaningful reasons. The Court further noted that the procedure insisted on by the authority, requiring a written option before use of a lower rate or composition mode, was not part of the prescribed process. The order was quashed for breach of natural justice, and the matter was remitted for fresh decision after disclosure of material and hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=162589</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>