https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313090 Writ interference was refused against cancellation of an FL-III licence under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, because the licence was prima facie obtained on a false premise. The Court found that the document used to secure the licence appeared tampered with and was used to create the impression of a duly sanctioned structure, while the tenancy arrangement did not show authority to obtain or operate the licence. Applying Section 54(1)(e), the Court treated wilful misrepresentation or fraud as a valid ground for cancellation and held that a licence obtained by fraud does not attract equitable interference. The challenge to cancellation therefore failed. en-us Mon, 15 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Mar 2024 19:14:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313090 Writ interference was refused against cancellation of an FL-III licence under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, 1949, because the licence was prima facie obtained on a false premise. The Court found that the document used to secure the licence appeared tampered with and was used to create the impression of a duly sanctioned structure, while the tenancy arrangement did not show authority to obtain or operate the licence. Applying Section 54(1)(e), the Court treated wilful misrepresentation or fraud as a valid ground for cancellation and held that a licence obtained by fraud does not attract equitable interference. The challenge to cancellation therefore failed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 15 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313090