Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The appellate tribunal held that there was no dispute regarding the transferability of the DFRC license. The appellants were unaware of the license holder after selling it, and it was the buyer's responsibility to register at the port of export and apply for Telegraphic Release Advice (TRA) as per the relevant public notice. The facts did not establish any mischief or wrongdoing by the appellants concerning the alleged change claimed by the revenue authorities. Since the appellants' role was unclear, imposing a penalty on them was not in accordance with the law. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, the penalty imposed on the appellants was deleted, and the appeal was allowed.
The appellate tribunal held that there was no dispute regarding the transferability of the DFRC license. The appellants were unaware of the license holder after selling it, and it was the buyer's responsibility to register at the port of export and apply for Telegraphic Release Advice (TRA) as per the relevant public notice. The facts did not establish any mischief or wrongdoing by the appellants concerning the alleged change claimed by the revenue authorities. Since the appellants' role was unclear, imposing a penalty on them was not in accordance with the law. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, the penalty imposed on the appellants was deleted, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.