Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Objective characteristics govern magnesium bis-glycinate chelate classification as an amino-acid coordination compound, not a food preparation or anti...
Independent professional certification requires pleaded knowledge or complicity for criminal liability; untimely complaints remain barred by limitatio...
Disciplinary action against a Customs Broker could be initiated on the basis of a show cause notice forwarded by Tuticorin Customs as the relevant offence report under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations. However, the Tribunal held that notice under Regulation 17(1) had to issue within ninety days of receipt of the offence report, and the Cochin Customs notice issued on 17.10.2022 was beyond that period if the Tuticorin notice dated 09.03.2022 was treated as the trigger. Because the prescribed procedure and timelines under Regulation 17 were not strictly followed, the penalty order under Regulation 18 was unsustainable and was set aside.
Disciplinary action against a Customs Broker could be initiated on the basis of a show cause notice forwarded by Tuticorin Customs as the relevant offence report under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations. However, the Tribunal held that notice under Regulation 17(1) had to issue within ninety days of receipt of the offence report, and the Cochin Customs notice issued on 17.10.2022 was beyond that period if the Tuticorin notice dated 09.03.2022 was treated as the trigger. Because the prescribed procedure and timelines under Regulation 17 were not strictly followed, the penalty order under Regulation 18 was unsustainable and was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.