Concurrent anticipatory-bail jurisdiction permits applications before either forum, while secured evidence may negate custodial interrogation in GST e...
Transfer Pricing Officer jurisdiction is transaction-specific, excluding permanent establishment determinations and requiring independent assessment o...
Rental income valuation requires credible local comparables; family-business salary and commercially expedient unsecured-loan interest remained deduct...
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 08.11.2021 revoking the customs broker license of the appellant. The Tribunal held that the principles of natural justice were violated as the show cause notice issued to the appellant was vague, failing to differentiate between regulations 17(1) and 17(6) of the 2018 Regulations. The appellant was not provided with the necessary documents and statements to submit a proper response and cross-examine the persons whose statements were recorded, violating the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal refrained from examining the documents itself, as it was the duty of the Inquiry Officer or the Commissioner to undertake this exercise.
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 08.11.2021 revoking the customs broker license of the appellant. The Tribunal held that the principles of natural justice were violated as the show cause notice issued to the appellant was vague, failing to differentiate between regulations 17(1) and 17(6) of the 2018 Regulations. The appellant was not provided with the necessary documents and statements to submit a proper response and cross-examine the persons whose statements were recorded, violating the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal refrained from examining the documents itself, as it was the duty of the Inquiry Officer or the Commissioner to undertake this exercise.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.