<?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 (6) TMI 752 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329043</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, allowing the writ petition and directing the first respondent to consider the renewal application and grant the renewal if in order, within four weeks from the date of the judgment. The court held that the refusal to renew the license based on the penalty imposed on the Managing Director was not sustainable as the regulations only disqualify officers directly handling customs work, not officers like the Managing Director.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Nov 2016 13:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432356" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 752 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329043</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, allowing the writ petition and directing the first respondent to consider the renewal application and grant the renewal if in order, within four weeks from the date of the judgment. The court held that the refusal to renew the license based on the penalty imposed on the Managing Director was not sustainable as the regulations only disqualify officers directly handling customs work, not officers like the Managing Director.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329043</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>