Clean slate principle extinguishes uncrystallised operational claims and bars continuation of pending recovery and arbitral proceedings after plan app...
Works contract classification governs composite layout-development contracts where VAT-paid goods are transferred alongside construction and infrastru...
Specified income tax exemption for pollution control body remains conditional on non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return filin...
Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
The Tribunal set aside the order of the licensing authority that revoked and forfeited the security deposit of a Customs Broker. The licensing authority alleged breach of regulations 10(d), 10(e), and 10(f) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. However, the Tribunal found that the substantial delay between the offence report in May 2022 and the final determination in January 2024 violated the timelines prescribed in Regulation 17 of the said Regulations. The licensing authority's attempt to justify the delay by citing transfer of officers was rejected, as the authority is responsible for efficient discharge of statutory and administrative roles. The Tribunal held that the mandatory stipulations in Regulation 17 were treated as directory without adhering to the Bombay High Court's decision in Unison Clearing Pvt. Ltd. case, rendering the proceedings invalid at the threshold.
The Tribunal set aside the order of the licensing authority that revoked and forfeited the security deposit of a Customs Broker. The licensing authority alleged breach of regulations 10(d), 10(e), and 10(f) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. However, the Tribunal found that the substantial delay between the offence report in May 2022 and the final determination in January 2024 violated the timelines prescribed in Regulation 17 of the said Regulations. The licensing authority's attempt to justify the delay by citing transfer of officers was rejected, as the authority is responsible for efficient discharge of statutory and administrative roles. The Tribunal held that the mandatory stipulations in Regulation 17 were treated as directory without adhering to the Bombay High Court's decision in Unison Clearing Pvt. Ltd. case, rendering the proceedings invalid at the threshold.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.