<?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>2016 (4) TMI 1063 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326949</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the appeal by the Customs Department against the revocation of the Customs House Agent (CHA) license due to a violation of time limits under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004. The Court found the delay of over three years in submitting the inquiry report unjustified, attributing it to insufficient reasons provided by the Department. Emphasizing that it was not bound by the precedential value of CESTAT orders, the Court upheld the decision that the revocation of the license was vitiated due to the unjustified delay, with no substantial question of law warranting further consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2016 10:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=425982" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 1063 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326949</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the appeal by the Customs Department against the revocation of the Customs House Agent (CHA) license due to a violation of time limits under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004. The Court found the delay of over three years in submitting the inquiry report unjustified, attributing it to insufficient reasons provided by the Department. Emphasizing that it was not bound by the precedential value of CESTAT orders, the Court upheld the decision that the revocation of the license was vitiated due to the unjustified delay, with no substantial question of law warranting further consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326949</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>