https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195359 Forfeiture of a CHA security deposit cannot be sustained independently where revocation of the CHA licence is not upheld. The Tribunal treated forfeiture under the licensing regulations as consequential to revocation, and applied the binding majority view, later affirmed by the High Court, to hold that once revocation fails, standalone forfeiture also falls. The contrary authorities relied on by Revenue were not followed. The forfeiture order was set aside and the appeal succeeded in favour of the assessee. en-us Thu, 17 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Oct 2017 12:17:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195359 Forfeiture of a CHA security deposit cannot be sustained independently where revocation of the CHA licence is not upheld. The Tribunal treated forfeiture under the licensing regulations as consequential to revocation, and applied the binding majority view, later affirmed by the High Court, to hold that once revocation fails, standalone forfeiture also falls. The contrary authorities relied on by Revenue were not followed. The forfeiture order was set aside and the appeal succeeded in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 17 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195359