https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215822 The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the revocation of the CHA Licence under Regulation 22 of the CHALR 2004. The Commissioner disagreed with the Inquiry Officer's findings on charges of fraudulent import and undervaluation, leading to the revocation. The appellant was found guilty of violating Regulation 13(a) but not other charges. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, citing their bona fide belief and lack of objection from Customs. Due to procedural lapses in confirming remaining charges without notice, the Tribunal found them not proved. The CHA Licence was reinstated with immediate effect, emphasizing procedural fairness. en-us Mon, 02 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215822 The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the revocation of the CHA Licence under Regulation 22 of the CHALR 2004. The Commissioner disagreed with the Inquiry Officer's findings on charges of fraudulent import and undervaluation, leading to the revocation. The appellant was found guilty of violating Regulation 13(a) but not other charges. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, citing their bona fide belief and lack of objection from Customs. Due to procedural lapses in confirming remaining charges without notice, the Tribunal found them not proved. The CHA Licence was reinstated with immediate effect, emphasizing procedural fairness. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 02 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215822