<?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 (8) TMI 48 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364576</link>
    <description>The court upheld the suspension order under Regulation 19(2) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR), dismissing the writ petition. It found the invocation of power under Regulation 19(1) appropriate, not barred by limitation, and justified based on the facts. The petitioner was given the liberty to appeal before the CESTAT, with a specific exclusion from the limitation period. No costs were awarded, and the related miscellaneous petition was closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Nov 2018 14:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=528977" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 48 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364576</link>
      <description>The court upheld the suspension order under Regulation 19(2) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR), dismissing the writ petition. It found the invocation of power under Regulation 19(1) appropriate, not barred by limitation, and justified based on the facts. The petitioner was given the liberty to appeal before the CESTAT, with a specific exclusion from the limitation period. No costs were awarded, and the related miscellaneous petition was closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364576</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>