<?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>2007 (2) TMI 15 -  CESTAT,  CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1246</link>
    <description>A CHA licence may be suspended only by the authority competent for that licence and within the jurisdiction where it is authorised to operate. Where a Coimbatore licence had no operative force in Mumbai because no Form-C intimation was given, alleged misconduct connected only with the separate Mumbai licence could not justify suspension of the Coimbatore licence. The absence of the required jurisdictional nexus meant the suspension power under the relevant regulation could not be invoked against the Coimbatore licence on facts arising entirely under another licence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 15:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40658" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 15 -  CESTAT,  CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1246</link>
      <description>A CHA licence may be suspended only by the authority competent for that licence and within the jurisdiction where it is authorised to operate. Where a Coimbatore licence had no operative force in Mumbai because no Form-C intimation was given, alleged misconduct connected only with the separate Mumbai licence could not justify suspension of the Coimbatore licence. The absence of the required jurisdictional nexus meant the suspension power under the relevant regulation could not be invoked against the Coimbatore licence on facts arising entirely under another licence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1246</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>