<?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>2019 (1) TMI 922 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373757</link>
    <description>Cancellation of candidature and debarment from the G Card examination were upheld where the candidate admitted participation in an unauthorized manual amendment of the Bill of Entry and the forensic record showed that the correction signature did not belong to the concerned Superintendent. The Court treated this conduct as involving forged and unauthorized official documentation, satisfying the regulatory concern for adverse antecedents and lack of integrity required for Customs Broker eligibility. The plea of violation of natural justice failed, and the request to send the signature for re-verification by another expert was rejected because an accepted CFSL report already existed and no basis was shown to doubt it.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2019 11:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=553680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 922 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373757</link>
      <description>Cancellation of candidature and debarment from the G Card examination were upheld where the candidate admitted participation in an unauthorized manual amendment of the Bill of Entry and the forensic record showed that the correction signature did not belong to the concerned Superintendent. The Court treated this conduct as involving forged and unauthorized official documentation, satisfying the regulatory concern for adverse antecedents and lack of integrity required for Customs Broker eligibility. The plea of violation of natural justice failed, and the request to send the signature for re-verification by another expert was rejected because an accepted CFSL report already existed and no basis was shown to doubt it.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373757</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>