Composite GST notices, mandatory limitation, and same-subject bar: HC upheld valid notices but quashed overlapping proceedings and unauthorised withho...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3221 to 3240 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" ?
A Customs Broker was not shown to have breached regulations 10(d), 10(e) or 10(n) of the 2018 Regulations. Regulation 10(d) only required advice to the client to comply with the Act and allied laws, and the authorization letter recorded that such advice had been given, so no further particulars were necessary. Regulation 10(e) was not violated because the exporter held a valid GST registration on the relevant export date, making the earlier cancellation immaterial. Regulation 10(n) also failed on the same basis, and the Tribunal noted that the Joint Commissioner had found no breach. The revocation of the licence and forfeiture of security were set aside, and restoration of the licence was directed.
A Customs Broker was not shown to have breached regulations 10(d), 10(e) or 10(n) of the 2018 Regulations. Regulation 10(d) only required advice to the client to comply with the Act and allied laws, and the authorization letter recorded that such advice had been given, so no further particulars were necessary. Regulation 10(e) was not violated because the exporter held a valid GST registration on the relevant export date, making the earlier cancellation immaterial. Regulation 10(n) also failed on the same basis, and the Tribunal noted that the Joint Commissioner had found no breach. The revocation of the licence and forfeiture of security were set aside, and restoration of the licence was directed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
