https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33481 The court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the CHA license remains valid unless revoked as per Regulation 20. The judgment clarified the application of Regulation 15(2) and the proviso, highlighting the distinction between resignation and demise/retirement in triggering the proviso. The obligation to appoint a qualified person within two years was underscored, and the necessity of compliance with the regulations for the continued operation of a CHA license was reiterated. en-us Fri, 11 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33481 The court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the CHA license remains valid unless revoked as per Regulation 20. The judgment clarified the application of Regulation 15(2) and the proviso, highlighting the distinction between resignation and demise/retirement in triggering the proviso. The obligation to appoint a qualified person within two years was underscored, and the necessity of compliance with the regulations for the continued operation of a CHA license was reiterated. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 11 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33481