<?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>2009 (3) TMI 922 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163885</link>
    <description>A tender bidder cannot satisfy a requirement for valid dealer registration and tax clearance by producing a certificate standing in the name of a deceased proprietor, because a proprietorship registration does not continue or devolve on death unless the statute so provides. A legal heir of the deceased proprietor has no independent right to seek amendment of a registration certificate that has ceased to operate. On that basis, a bid founded on an invalid registration and tax clearance was treated as non-compliant, and cancellation of the agreement with arrangement of supply through the next eligible bidder was considered justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352110" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 922 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163885</link>
      <description>A tender bidder cannot satisfy a requirement for valid dealer registration and tax clearance by producing a certificate standing in the name of a deceased proprietor, because a proprietorship registration does not continue or devolve on death unless the statute so provides. A legal heir of the deceased proprietor has no independent right to seek amendment of a registration certificate that has ceased to operate. On that basis, a bid founded on an invalid registration and tax clearance was treated as non-compliant, and cancellation of the agreement with arrangement of supply through the next eligible bidder was considered justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=163885</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>