<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (7) TMI 1012 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182508</link>
    <description>A Customs House Agent&#039;s licence may be revoked where the record shows use of an unauthorised intermediary, commission-based handling of CHA work, lack of client authorisations, and failure to maintain proper records and accounts, as these breaches attract Regulations 12, 13(b), 13(a) and 13(k). A charge under Regulation 13(d) based on alleged overvaluation and fraudulent drawback cannot stand where the underlying finding of over-invoicing has already been rejected and FOB value, PMV and drawback entitlement were found to be correctly declared. The text notes that revocation was sustained on the proved regulatory breaches, while the separate exclusion penalty was moderated and business resumption was permitted from a specified date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 May 2016 12:22:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427963" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 1012 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182508</link>
      <description>A Customs House Agent&#039;s licence may be revoked where the record shows use of an unauthorised intermediary, commission-based handling of CHA work, lack of client authorisations, and failure to maintain proper records and accounts, as these breaches attract Regulations 12, 13(b), 13(a) and 13(k). A charge under Regulation 13(d) based on alleged overvaluation and fraudulent drawback cannot stand where the underlying finding of over-invoicing has already been rejected and FOB value, PMV and drawback entitlement were found to be correctly declared. The text notes that revocation was sustained on the proved regulatory breaches, while the separate exclusion penalty was moderated and business resumption was permitted from a specified date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182508</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>