<?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 (11) TMI 782 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218767</link>
    <description>Passing the Customs House Agents examination under the 1984 Regulations did not, by itself, satisfy the later qualification regime, but candidates could be treated as eligible under the 2004 Regulations if they passed the additional prescribed subjects identified in Board circulars. The circulars also required eligible candidates to be granted licences without imposing an extraneous numerical restriction. A refusal based solely on the fact that the examination was passed in another Customs House jurisdiction was not a valid ground, because the relevant examination was conducted centrally and the later circulars governed eligibility. The licence rejection was therefore set aside and reconsideration was directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 12:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192138" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 782 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218767</link>
      <description>Passing the Customs House Agents examination under the 1984 Regulations did not, by itself, satisfy the later qualification regime, but candidates could be treated as eligible under the 2004 Regulations if they passed the additional prescribed subjects identified in Board circulars. The circulars also required eligible candidates to be granted licences without imposing an extraneous numerical restriction. A refusal based solely on the fact that the examination was passed in another Customs House jurisdiction was not a valid ground, because the relevant examination was conducted centrally and the later circulars governed eligibility. The licence rejection was therefore set aside and reconsideration was directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=218767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>