International transaction characterisation of domestic divestment of support services business rejected; transaction between resident associated enter...
Minimum Import Price restrictions for Black Pepper, Areca-nuts and Apples upheld; procedural laying failure not fatal, notifications to be placed befo...
Transaction value between related persons requires market-equivalent pricing; importer must prove declared value mirrors ordinary international trade ...
Classification of exported insecticides under export tariff affirmed; reclassification and related penalties set aside and MEIS scrip jurisdiction rec...
CESTAT found that the 90 day limit under Regulation 17(7) did...
Authorization requirements for customs brokers and benami shipping bills: tribunal upholds licence revocation and penalties after COVID time limit found applicable
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
CESTAT found that the 90 day limit under Regulation 17(7) did not lapse because the COVID extension covered the inquiry and order dates; therefore the order was timely. The tribunal held that a customs broker breached Regulation 10(a) and 10(d) by filing benami shipping bills using third party IECs without authorization or contact, and breached Regulation 10(n) by failing to verify IEC, PAN, GSTIN and client KYC. No breach of Regulation 10(e) was found. Given the deliberate filing of benami bills, the tribunal upheld revocation of licence, forfeiture of security and a monetary penalty.
CESTAT found that the 90 day limit under Regulation 17(7) did not lapse because the COVID extension covered the inquiry and order dates; therefore the order was timely. The tribunal held that a customs broker breached Regulation 10(a) and 10(d) by filing benami shipping bills using third party IECs without authorization or contact, and breached Regulation 10(n) by failing to verify IEC, PAN, GSTIN and client KYC. No breach of Regulation 10(e) was found. Given the deliberate filing of benami bills, the tribunal upheld revocation of licence, forfeiture of security and a monetary penalty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.