<?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>2025 (6) TMI 1371 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773258</link>
    <description>The HC set aside a Single Judge&#039;s order that granted a customs broker license based solely on passing the written examination. The petitioner cleared the written test but failed the oral examination twice under the 2013 Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations. The HC held that &quot;an examination&quot; under Regulation 17(3) encompasses both written and viva-voce components as a composite process, rejecting dictionary-based interpretation in favor of contextual statutory reading. The Court applied the principle that examination rules cannot be changed after commencement, emphasizing the petitioner&#039;s delay and conduct in approaching the Court only after failing the oral portion twice disentitled him from relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2025 08:34:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=830397" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 1371 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773258</link>
      <description>The HC set aside a Single Judge&#039;s order that granted a customs broker license based solely on passing the written examination. The petitioner cleared the written test but failed the oral examination twice under the 2013 Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations. The HC held that &quot;an examination&quot; under Regulation 17(3) encompasses both written and viva-voce components as a composite process, rejecting dictionary-based interpretation in favor of contextual statutory reading. The Court applied the principle that examination rules cannot be changed after commencement, emphasizing the petitioner&#039;s delay and conduct in approaching the Court only after failing the oral portion twice disentitled him from relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773258</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>