<?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>2015 (1) TMI 577 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255378</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the suspension order of a CHA License due to non-compliance with the procedural requirements under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004. The Hon&#039;ble Madras High Court upheld the decision, emphasizing the necessity of issuing a show cause notice and conducting an enquiry as mandated by the regulations. The appeal was allowed, and the suspension order was deemed unjustified without following the proper procedure under Regulation 22.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Feb 2016 12:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373983" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 577 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255378</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the suspension order of a CHA License due to non-compliance with the procedural requirements under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004. The Hon&#039;ble Madras High Court upheld the decision, emphasizing the necessity of issuing a show cause notice and conducting an enquiry as mandated by the regulations. The appeal was allowed, and the suspension order was deemed unjustified without following the proper procedure under Regulation 22.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255378</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>