https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261920 The Tribunal set aside the revocation of the CHA license and forfeiture of the security deposit, ruling in favor of the appellant. It found that the Revenue failed to prove the alleged violations of various regulations, emphasizing the importance of proportionality in punishment and the CHA's livelihood. The Tribunal highlighted that delays in enquiry proceedings and admissibility of statements were not conclusive grounds for revocation. Overall, the appeal was allowed due to the lack of substantial evidence supporting the charges against the appellant. en-us Fri, 05 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261920 The Tribunal set aside the revocation of the CHA license and forfeiture of the security deposit, ruling in favor of the appellant. It found that the Revenue failed to prove the alleged violations of various regulations, emphasizing the importance of proportionality in punishment and the CHA's livelihood. The Tribunal highlighted that delays in enquiry proceedings and admissibility of statements were not conclusive grounds for revocation. Overall, the appeal was allowed due to the lack of substantial evidence supporting the charges against the appellant. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 05 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261920