<?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>2026 (8) TMI 737 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796863</link>
    <description>Regulation 11(2) permits immediate suspension of a Customs Cargo Service Provider approval only as an exceptional preventive measure where an urgent and continuing risk objectively justifies action without awaiting inquiry. It is distinct from suspension or revocation under Regulation 11(1), which requires the procedural safeguards in Regulation 12. Continuing preventive suspension requires a demonstrated subsisting necessity, timely verification of alleged deficiencies, and consideration of proportionate alternatives. Where no inquiry commenced, corrective measures remained unverified, supervised cargo operations continued without incident, and enhanced conditions could address revenue and security concerns, indefinite suspension was unsustainable. Approval required restoration, without limiting lawful proceedings under Regulation 11(1).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2026 08:19:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=916623" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 737 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796863</link>
      <description>Regulation 11(2) permits immediate suspension of a Customs Cargo Service Provider approval only as an exceptional preventive measure where an urgent and continuing risk objectively justifies action without awaiting inquiry. It is distinct from suspension or revocation under Regulation 11(1), which requires the procedural safeguards in Regulation 12. Continuing preventive suspension requires a demonstrated subsisting necessity, timely verification of alleged deficiencies, and consideration of proportionate alternatives. Where no inquiry commenced, corrective measures remained unverified, supervised cargo operations continued without incident, and enhanced conditions could address revenue and security concerns, indefinite suspension was unsustainable. Approval required restoration, without limiting lawful proceedings under Regulation 11(1).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796863</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>