<?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>2014 (4) TMI 729 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246760</link>
    <description>Cancellation of VAT registration could be made only on the grounds specified in section 27 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, once the registration had moved beyond a provisional stage. Even where a permissible ground existed, the Commissioner was required to give the dealer a hearing and record reasons before cancelling the registration, including any cancellation ab initio. An order passed without communicating the proposed grounds and without hearing the dealer was procedurally defective, and reliance on the rules could not cure that non-compliance. The cancellation order was quashed, while the authority was left free to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after following the mandatory procedure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2014 17:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353386" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (4) TMI 729 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246760</link>
      <description>Cancellation of VAT registration could be made only on the grounds specified in section 27 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, once the registration had moved beyond a provisional stage. Even where a permissible ground existed, the Commissioner was required to give the dealer a hearing and record reasons before cancelling the registration, including any cancellation ab initio. An order passed without communicating the proposed grounds and without hearing the dealer was procedurally defective, and reliance on the rules could not cure that non-compliance. The cancellation order was quashed, while the authority was left free to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after following the mandatory procedure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246760</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>