<?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>1980 (12) TMI 202 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305039</link>
    <description>Refusal of registration of a registered user was unsustainable because the authority gave no intelligible reasons and merely repeated statutory language. Where the governing statute requires a hearing before an adverse administrative decision, the decision-maker must disclose the factual basis for refusal so the affected party can make an effective representation and judicial review is possible. A bare statement that registration would not be in the public interest or aid indigenous industry did not satisfy the duty to give reasons. The refusal orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration after disclosure of grounds and a further hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2022 11:16:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695651" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (12) TMI 202 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305039</link>
      <description>Refusal of registration of a registered user was unsustainable because the authority gave no intelligible reasons and merely repeated statutory language. Where the governing statute requires a hearing before an adverse administrative decision, the decision-maker must disclose the factual basis for refusal so the affected party can make an effective representation and judicial review is possible. A bare statement that registration would not be in the public interest or aid indigenous industry did not satisfy the duty to give reasons. The refusal orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration after disclosure of grounds and a further hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305039</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>