Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Assessee's project-completion revenue recognition upheld; income addition deleted under Guidance Note/AS-9 and percentage-completion rules as complian...
Revocation/suspension of a customs broker licence was challenged on the ground that the Commissioner failed to issue the revocation notice within 90 days from the offence report as mandated by Regulation 17(1) of CBLR, 2018. Relying on consistent HC authority treating these timelines as mandatory, the Tribunal held that breach of the statutory timeline vitiates the proceedings and the impugned order cannot be sustained. While noting certain procedural lapses by the broker (including inadequate record maintenance and permitting duty payment through another broker), the Tribunal emphasised proportionality and the prolonged suspension already undergone, and set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal. - CESTAT
Revocation/suspension of a customs broker licence was challenged on the ground that the Commissioner failed to issue the revocation notice within 90 days from the offence report as mandated by Regulation 17(1) of CBLR, 2018. Relying on consistent HC authority treating these timelines as mandatory, the Tribunal held that breach of the statutory timeline vitiates the proceedings and the impugned order cannot be sustained. While noting certain procedural lapses by the broker (including inadequate record maintenance and permitting duty payment through another broker), the Tribunal emphasised proportionality and the prolonged suspension already undergone, and set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal. - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
