<?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 (10) TMI 564 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333544</link>
    <description>The special licensing regime for ammonium nitrate under the Explosives Act and the Ammonium Nitrate Rules permits interim suspension of a Form P-3 licence where the authority reasonably believes violation may create imminent public danger, and prior hearing is not required at that stage. The suspension was supported by recorded reasons and was treated as within the licensing authority&#039;s jurisdiction. The Rules were also read to allow refusal of a Form P-5 import licence to a trader, since import licences may be confined to actual users in the interest of regulatory control and national security. The impugned suspension and refusal were therefore upheld as lawful and reasonable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2016 17:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445057" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 564 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333544</link>
      <description>The special licensing regime for ammonium nitrate under the Explosives Act and the Ammonium Nitrate Rules permits interim suspension of a Form P-3 licence where the authority reasonably believes violation may create imminent public danger, and prior hearing is not required at that stage. The suspension was supported by recorded reasons and was treated as within the licensing authority&#039;s jurisdiction. The Rules were also read to allow refusal of a Form P-5 import licence to a trader, since import licences may be confined to actual users in the interest of regulatory control and national security. The impugned suspension and refusal were therefore upheld as lawful and reasonable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333544</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>