https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327684 Suspension of registration under section 17(12) of the Uttar Pradesh VAT Act was invalid because that power could be exercised only during pending cancellation proceedings under section 17(11), and the admitted facts showed no such proceedings were pending when the order was made. The statutory precondition for suspension was therefore absent, and the order was quashed. The Court did not interfere with the seizure order, noting that the statutory alternative remedy under section 48(7), followed by an appeal under section 57, was available. en-us Tue, 12 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 May 2016 22:15:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327684 Suspension of registration under section 17(12) of the Uttar Pradesh VAT Act was invalid because that power could be exercised only during pending cancellation proceedings under section 17(11), and the admitted facts showed no such proceedings were pending when the order was made. The statutory precondition for suspension was therefore absent, and the order was quashed. The Court did not interfere with the seizure order, noting that the statutory alternative remedy under section 48(7), followed by an appeal under section 57, was available. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 12 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327684