<?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>2000 (3) TMI 93 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49793</link>
    <description>An order withholding renewal of a Customs House Agent licence under the Customs House Licensing Regulations, 1984 was treated as administrative rather than adjudicatory because the Regulations did not require notice, hearing, or any quasi-judicial procedure for renewal refusal. The absence of a statutory adjudication framework meant the Commissioner was not acting as an adjudicating authority for the purpose of Section 129A(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. A statement in the order suggesting an appeal to the Tribunal could not create appellate jurisdiction where the statute did not confer it. The Tribunal accordingly had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:28:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88273" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 93 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49793</link>
      <description>An order withholding renewal of a Customs House Agent licence under the Customs House Licensing Regulations, 1984 was treated as administrative rather than adjudicatory because the Regulations did not require notice, hearing, or any quasi-judicial procedure for renewal refusal. The absence of a statutory adjudication framework meant the Commissioner was not acting as an adjudicating authority for the purpose of Section 129A(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. A statement in the order suggesting an appeal to the Tribunal could not create appellate jurisdiction where the statute did not confer it. The Tribunal accordingly had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49793</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>