<?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>2012 (6) TMI 54 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213734</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that no appeal lies before it against the rejection of a license renewal under Regulation 11 of CHA 2004. However, a Customs House Agent (CHA) can challenge such rejection before the Chief Commissioner as per Regulation 9(5) of the CHA Regulation. The Tribunal emphasized that the rejection of renewal should be treated similarly to the rejection of a new license application, as both lead to the denial of the CHA&#039;s ability to operate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2012 13:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=187134" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 54 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213734</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that no appeal lies before it against the rejection of a license renewal under Regulation 11 of CHA 2004. However, a Customs House Agent (CHA) can challenge such rejection before the Chief Commissioner as per Regulation 9(5) of the CHA Regulation. The Tribunal emphasized that the rejection of renewal should be treated similarly to the rejection of a new license application, as both lead to the denial of the CHA&#039;s ability to operate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213734</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>