<?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>2010 (5) TMI 765 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164475</link>
    <description>Revisional cancellation of a registration certificate was upheld where the authority had statutory power to examine legality and propriety, and the cancellation provision allowed action for violation, misuse, or other sufficient cause after notice and hearing. The record also supported the finding that the new firm obtained registration by concealing material facts, including the existence of an earlier firm of the same name at the same premises and undisclosed interests in other business. On those facts, the cancellation was supported by adequate material, and affirmation by the Tribunal was justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2014 13:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353863" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 765 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164475</link>
      <description>Revisional cancellation of a registration certificate was upheld where the authority had statutory power to examine legality and propriety, and the cancellation provision allowed action for violation, misuse, or other sufficient cause after notice and hearing. The record also supported the finding that the new firm obtained registration by concealing material facts, including the existence of an earlier firm of the same name at the same premises and undisclosed interests in other business. On those facts, the cancellation was supported by adequate material, and affirmation by the Tribunal was justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=164475</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>