Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
