https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190199 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the revocation of the Custom Broker License (CBL) under Regulation 20(7) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013. It was determined that the appellant had not sublet or transferred their CBL, as M/s. A.H. Enterprises was engaged in consultancy and forwarding services, not clearance of goods. The Tribunal found insufficient evidence to support the sub-letting allegations, leading to the decision in favor of the appellant on 9-4-2015. en-us Thu, 09 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Feb 2017 08:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190199 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the revocation of the Custom Broker License (CBL) under Regulation 20(7) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013. It was determined that the appellant had not sublet or transferred their CBL, as M/s. A.H. Enterprises was engaged in consultancy and forwarding services, not clearance of goods. The Tribunal found insufficient evidence to support the sub-letting allegations, leading to the decision in favor of the appellant on 9-4-2015. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 09 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190199