<?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>2000 (8) TMI 1110 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175819</link>
    <description>Cancellation of a sales tax registration certificate was held unsustainable where the statute required the dealer to be given an opportunity of being heard before cancellation, but only notice and objections were exchanged and no personal hearing was afforded. The Court applied the settled principle that when a statute prescribes the manner of doing an act, it must be done in that manner or not at all, especially where the power is drastic and carries serious civil consequences. It further held that the existence of a revisional remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where the impugned order was vitiated by breach of mandatory procedure and natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2015 16:16:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=407849" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 1110 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175819</link>
      <description>Cancellation of a sales tax registration certificate was held unsustainable where the statute required the dealer to be given an opportunity of being heard before cancellation, but only notice and objections were exchanged and no personal hearing was afforded. The Court applied the settled principle that when a statute prescribes the manner of doing an act, it must be done in that manner or not at all, especially where the power is drastic and carries serious civil consequences. It further held that the existence of a revisional remedy did not bar writ jurisdiction where the impugned order was vitiated by breach of mandatory procedure and natural justice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175819</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>