https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277383 Full and frank disclosure is required when discretionary relief is sought; suppression of a prior request for implementation of the same order can render a later challenge not maintainable because a litigant cannot approbate and reprobate. The court also noted that an earlier direction to consider applications on materials available up to 1 June 2005 did not bar later proceedings arising from a separate administrative decision, and that approval under the governing public distribution order must be taken on the complete record and within the authority conferred. The restriction to pre-cutoff materials was treated as consistent with the regulatory framework. en-us Thu, 18 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Dec 2018 11:30:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277383 Full and frank disclosure is required when discretionary relief is sought; suppression of a prior request for implementation of the same order can render a later challenge not maintainable because a litigant cannot approbate and reprobate. The court also noted that an earlier direction to consider applications on materials available up to 1 June 2005 did not bar later proceedings arising from a separate administrative decision, and that approval under the governing public distribution order must be taken on the complete record and within the authority conferred. The restriction to pre-cutoff materials was treated as consistent with the regulatory framework. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277383