<?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>2002 (11) TMI 466 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107018</link>
    <description>Suspension of a customs house agent&#039;s licence under Regulation 21(2) is not justified merely because an employee allegedly committed an assault; responsibility under Regulation 20(7) extends only to acts or omissions connected with employment and the conduct of business as agent. Where the incident was outside the employee&#039;s duties and not shown to be directed or furthering the agent&#039;s business, that ground fails. Alleged past contraventions also do not support suspension when the department knew of the matters long before but took no immediate action, indicating they were not treated as requiring urgent suspension.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Mar 2012 10:40:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144038" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (11) TMI 466 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107018</link>
      <description>Suspension of a customs house agent&#039;s licence under Regulation 21(2) is not justified merely because an employee allegedly committed an assault; responsibility under Regulation 20(7) extends only to acts or omissions connected with employment and the conduct of business as agent. Where the incident was outside the employee&#039;s duties and not shown to be directed or furthering the agent&#039;s business, that ground fails. Alleged past contraventions also do not support suspension when the department knew of the matters long before but took no immediate action, indicating they were not treated as requiring urgent suspension.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107018</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>