https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267390 The Division Bench clarified the distinction between Regulations 20 and 22 of the CHALR, 2004, regarding suspension and revocation procedures. The Court dismissed the civil miscellaneous appeal by the Revenue, affirming the CESTAT's decision to set aside the suspension order. The judgment highlighted the importance of procedural compliance in matters of licence suspension and emphasized the distinct procedures outlined in the relevant regulations. en-us Tue, 25 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jan 2016 14:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267390 The Division Bench clarified the distinction between Regulations 20 and 22 of the CHALR, 2004, regarding suspension and revocation procedures. The Court dismissed the civil miscellaneous appeal by the Revenue, affirming the CESTAT's decision to set aside the suspension order. The judgment highlighted the importance of procedural compliance in matters of licence suspension and emphasized the distinct procedures outlined in the relevant regulations. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 25 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267390