<?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>2023 (3) TMI 808 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435422</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the respondent&#039;s Customs Broker License, ruling that the revocation by the Principal Commissioner of Customs was unjustified. Despite allegations of noncompliance, the Tribunal found the respondent had not breached regulations and acted diligently. The penalty was reduced to a forfeiture of Rs.25,000 from the respondent&#039;s security deposit. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial legal question arose from the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Mar 2023 08:33:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=708097" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (3) TMI 808 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435422</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the respondent&#039;s Customs Broker License, ruling that the revocation by the Principal Commissioner of Customs was unjustified. Despite allegations of noncompliance, the Tribunal found the respondent had not breached regulations and acted diligently. The penalty was reduced to a forfeiture of Rs.25,000 from the respondent&#039;s security deposit. The appeal was dismissed as no substantial legal question arose from the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435422</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>