<?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>2014 (1) TMI 1478 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243263</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the revocation of the CHA licence due to the appellant&#039;s involvement in unauthorized clearances and allowing the unauthorized use of their licence. The decision emphasized the lack of authority in the appellant&#039;s actions, distinguishing them from cases involving regular employees with customs passes. The Tribunal rejected arguments of inconsistency in penalties and insufficient consideration of the employee&#039;s status, confirming violations under CHALR, 2004, and dismissing the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2014 10:17:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=343992" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 1478 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243263</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the revocation of the CHA licence due to the appellant&#039;s involvement in unauthorized clearances and allowing the unauthorized use of their licence. The decision emphasized the lack of authority in the appellant&#039;s actions, distinguishing them from cases involving regular employees with customs passes. The Tribunal rejected arguments of inconsistency in penalties and insufficient consideration of the employee&#039;s status, confirming violations under CHALR, 2004, and dismissing the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=243263</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>