https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212279 The tribunal upheld the order prohibiting the Customs House Agent from conducting business in Chennai Customs Jurisdiction without a personal or post-decisional hearing. The appeal challenging the Commissioner's order was dismissed, emphasizing that Regulation 21 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004, does not require such hearings and grants the Commissioner authority to issue prohibition orders without additional requirements. The tribunal highlighted the distinction between Regulation 21 and Regulation 20(3) regarding hearing procedures, affirming the Commissioner's decision and underscoring compliance with regulatory frameworks for Customs House Agents. en-us Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Mar 2012 13:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212279 The tribunal upheld the order prohibiting the Customs House Agent from conducting business in Chennai Customs Jurisdiction without a personal or post-decisional hearing. The appeal challenging the Commissioner's order was dismissed, emphasizing that Regulation 21 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004, does not require such hearings and grants the Commissioner authority to issue prohibition orders without additional requirements. The tribunal highlighted the distinction between Regulation 21 and Regulation 20(3) regarding hearing procedures, affirming the Commissioner's decision and underscoring compliance with regulatory frameworks for Customs House Agents. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212279