https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363404 The court addressed the challenge to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) order due to quorum non juris. The petitioners argued that a Division Bench was required for CHA license matters under Section 129C of the Customs Act 1962, contrary to the single-member decision. The respondents claimed CESTAT's authority for single-member adjudication under Section 129, but lacked proper authorization in this case. The court found the single-member decision without jurisdiction, declared it a nullity, and quashed the order, emphasizing adherence to procedural requirements and proper authorization in tribunal decisions. en-us Mon, 02 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Nov 2018 14:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363404 The court addressed the challenge to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) order due to quorum non juris. The petitioners argued that a Division Bench was required for CHA license matters under Section 129C of the Customs Act 1962, contrary to the single-member decision. The respondents claimed CESTAT's authority for single-member adjudication under Section 129, but lacked proper authorization in this case. The court found the single-member decision without jurisdiction, declared it a nullity, and quashed the order, emphasizing adherence to procedural requirements and proper authorization in tribunal decisions. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 02 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363404