https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44627 The Supreme Court's status quo order was construed as preserving the factual position as on 8 August 1994, not as preventing Customs Authorities from examining pending applications for temporary CHA licence under Clause 8 of the Customs House Agents (Licensing) Regulation, 1984. On that construction, the statutory authority remained free to consider the applications on merits, and the record showed that such applications had in fact been taken up after the order. There was therefore no legal bar to directing the Customs Authorities to process and dispose of the applicants' requests in accordance with law. en-us Tue, 02 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Jul 2010 13:27:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44627 The Supreme Court's status quo order was construed as preserving the factual position as on 8 August 1994, not as preventing Customs Authorities from examining pending applications for temporary CHA licence under Clause 8 of the Customs House Agents (Licensing) Regulation, 1984. On that construction, the statutory authority remained free to consider the applications on merits, and the record showed that such applications had in fact been taken up after the order. There was therefore no legal bar to directing the Customs Authorities to process and dispose of the applicants' requests in accordance with law. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 02 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44627