https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190440 A revisional order affecting existing rights and licences was held invalid because section 77(2) required a written notice and a real opportunity to make representation before any prejudicial order was passed; prior correspondence or inferred knowledge did not satisfy that mandatory safeguard, so the order was liable to be quashed. The statutory scheme also treated a Deputy Registrar acting under section 16(5) as a subordinate authority under the Registrar's superintendence, so the Registrar could entertain revision under section 77 against that officer's proceedings. The statutory delegate principle invoked in support of the objection was found inapplicable to this framework. en-us Wed, 28 Sep 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:21:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190440 A revisional order affecting existing rights and licences was held invalid because section 77(2) required a written notice and a real opportunity to make representation before any prejudicial order was passed; prior correspondence or inferred knowledge did not satisfy that mandatory safeguard, so the order was liable to be quashed. The statutory scheme also treated a Deputy Registrar acting under section 16(5) as a subordinate authority under the Registrar's superintendence, so the Registrar could entertain revision under section 77 against that officer's proceedings. The statutory delegate principle invoked in support of the objection was found inapplicable to this framework. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 28 Sep 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190440