<?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 (12) TMI 624 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352355</link>
    <description>A Customs Broker&#039;s licence may be suspended in an appropriate case requiring immediate action where due diligence and client-advisement duties are breached, and the Commissioner is not confined to treating the matter only as one warranting a monetary penalty. The Court found that the broker had a duty to advise compliance with law, particularly given the earlier classification dispute over identical goods, and that the post-suspension hearing requirement was met. It also held that there was no unexplained delay in invoking suspension powers and that the continuation of suspension pending proceedings was neither perverse nor arbitrary. The writ petition was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2018 11:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499537" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 624 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352355</link>
      <description>A Customs Broker&#039;s licence may be suspended in an appropriate case requiring immediate action where due diligence and client-advisement duties are breached, and the Commissioner is not confined to treating the matter only as one warranting a monetary penalty. The Court found that the broker had a duty to advise compliance with law, particularly given the earlier classification dispute over identical goods, and that the post-suspension hearing requirement was met. It also held that there was no unexplained delay in invoking suspension powers and that the continuation of suspension pending proceedings was neither perverse nor arbitrary. The writ petition was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352355</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>