<?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>2017 (5) TMI 1007 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343269</link>
    <description>In customs broker licensing proceedings, compliance with the prescribed timelines is a necessary condition for validity. Where the inquiry and consequential decision are completed after substantial delay beyond the regulatory period, the delay is not a mere irregularity but vitiates the disciplinary action. On that reasoning, the revocation of the licence and forfeiture of the security deposit were held unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 May 2017 07:26:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=469368" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 1007 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343269</link>
      <description>In customs broker licensing proceedings, compliance with the prescribed timelines is a necessary condition for validity. Where the inquiry and consequential decision are completed after substantial delay beyond the regulatory period, the delay is not a mere irregularity but vitiates the disciplinary action. On that reasoning, the revocation of the licence and forfeiture of the security deposit were held unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343269</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>