https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463856 The SC disposed the appeal, holding that the authority's move to blacklist the contractor for alleged contractual delay was unjustified. The Court reiterated that blacklisting is stigmatic and may be imposed only on strong, independent evidence, not merely for breach when legal remedies exist. It found the show-cause process to be largely formalistic and often predecisional; issuing notice and awaiting a final order would be an empty formality here. The matter could not support blacklisting on the facts, so the appeal was allowed and the blacklist action set aside. en-us Wed, 12 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Sep 2025 12:59:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463856 The SC disposed the appeal, holding that the authority's move to blacklist the contractor for alleged contractual delay was unjustified. The Court reiterated that blacklisting is stigmatic and may be imposed only on strong, independent evidence, not merely for breach when legal remedies exist. It found the show-cause process to be largely formalistic and often predecisional; issuing notice and awaiting a final order would be an empty formality here. The matter could not support blacklisting on the facts, so the appeal was allowed and the blacklist action set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463856