<?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>2004 (1) TMI 412 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110471</link>
    <description>The Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 do not provide any express power to cancel a duly granted &#039;G&#039; Card once issued after the Regulation 20(3) examination. The commentary notes that the approval power in Regulation 20(1) concerns appointment by a Customs House Agent and cannot be stretched to withdrawal of the card itself. Alleged misconduct in the examination hall, even if established, may justify action relating to the examination process, but not cancellation of the card, particularly where the punishment is disproportionate to the lapse alleged. On that reasoning, the cancellation was without authority of law and could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:05:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147487" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (1) TMI 412 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110471</link>
      <description>The Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 do not provide any express power to cancel a duly granted &#039;G&#039; Card once issued after the Regulation 20(3) examination. The commentary notes that the approval power in Regulation 20(1) concerns appointment by a Customs House Agent and cannot be stretched to withdrawal of the card itself. Alleged misconduct in the examination hall, even if established, may justify action relating to the examination process, but not cancellation of the card, particularly where the punishment is disproportionate to the lapse alleged. On that reasoning, the cancellation was without authority of law and could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110471</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>