<?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 754 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329045</link>
    <description>Time limits prescribed in the CHA licensing regulations for initiation and completion of revocation proceedings are mandatory, not directory. Where the licence was first suspended, followed by notice and inquiry, but the final revocation order was passed after an unexplained and inordinate delay, the statutory disciplinary scheme was held to be frustrated and serious prejudice caused to the licence holder. The revocation order was therefore unsustainable for breach of the mandatory time schedule and was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2016 11:56:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432358" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 754 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329045</link>
      <description>Time limits prescribed in the CHA licensing regulations for initiation and completion of revocation proceedings are mandatory, not directory. Where the licence was first suspended, followed by notice and inquiry, but the final revocation order was passed after an unexplained and inordinate delay, the statutory disciplinary scheme was held to be frustrated and serious prejudice caused to the licence holder. The revocation order was therefore unsustainable for breach of the mandatory time schedule and was set aside.</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=329045</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>