https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364452 An order cancelling an advance licence and imposing penalty was found unsustainable where the adjudicating authority relied on allegations of fraud, suppression and misrepresentation without properly addressing the petitioners' material contentions or mitigating facts. The reasoning did not engage with the plea that imports were within the revised entitlement, export obligation had been discharged, and the transferee had not been shown to have participated in the original procurement of the licence. The charge findings were also expressed in uncertain and mixed terms, without clearly identifying which allegation was established. Because the order lacked cogent reasoning and failed to deal with the admitted factual position and without-prejudice submissions, the cancellation and consequential penalty were quashed. en-us Thu, 26 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Nov 2018 13:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364452 An order cancelling an advance licence and imposing penalty was found unsustainable where the adjudicating authority relied on allegations of fraud, suppression and misrepresentation without properly addressing the petitioners' material contentions or mitigating facts. The reasoning did not engage with the plea that imports were within the revised entitlement, export obligation had been discharged, and the transferee had not been shown to have participated in the original procurement of the licence. The charge findings were also expressed in uncertain and mixed terms, without clearly identifying which allegation was established. Because the order lacked cogent reasoning and failed to deal with the admitted factual position and without-prejudice submissions, the cancellation and consequential penalty were quashed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 26 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364452