<?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>2006 (9) TMI 425 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120127</link>
    <description>A Customs House Agent licence under suspension for a substantial period justified early final hearing of the appeal. The order also stated that forfeiture of security deposit is not meant to accompany mere suspension of a CHA licence, because forfeiture is linked to revocation rather than suspension. On that basis, the adverse direction concerning the security deposit was treated as unsustainable, and the appeal was ordered to be listed for final hearing at an early date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 10:51:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (9) TMI 425 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120127</link>
      <description>A Customs House Agent licence under suspension for a substantial period justified early final hearing of the appeal. The order also stated that forfeiture of security deposit is not meant to accompany mere suspension of a CHA licence, because forfeiture is linked to revocation rather than suspension. On that basis, the adverse direction concerning the security deposit was treated as unsustainable, and the appeal was ordered to be listed for final hearing at an early date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120127</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>