<?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>2018 (2) TMI 33 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354612</link>
    <description>Licences issued for the Mumbai and Coimbatore Customs House Agent operations were treated as operating under separate regulatory regimes, so rights and obligations attached to one licence did not automatically extend to the other in the absence of Form-C intimation. On that basis, the Coimbatore Commissioner could not suspend the Coimbatore licence for matters arising only from the Mumbai licence&#039;s field of operation. The Court further noted that the Tribunal had appreciated the facts correctly and that no substantial question of law arose, so the challenge to the suspension order failed and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2018 12:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=506860" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 33 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354612</link>
      <description>Licences issued for the Mumbai and Coimbatore Customs House Agent operations were treated as operating under separate regulatory regimes, so rights and obligations attached to one licence did not automatically extend to the other in the absence of Form-C intimation. On that basis, the Coimbatore Commissioner could not suspend the Coimbatore licence for matters arising only from the Mumbai licence&#039;s field of operation. The Court further noted that the Tribunal had appreciated the facts correctly and that no substantial question of law arose, so the challenge to the suspension order failed and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354612</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>