https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387020 The tribunal held that the time frame prescribed in Regulation 20(5) of CBLR, 2013 is directory, not mandatory, and non-compliance did not vitiate the action against the appellant. The tribunal found the appellant guilty of hatching a conspiracy for the clandestine removal of warehoused goods without paying customs duty, committing forgery, misrepresentation, fraud, and forgery. The order confirming violations of regulations led to the cancellation of the appellant's license, forfeiture of the security deposit, and imposition of a penalty, with the appeal being dismissed. en-us Tue, 01 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Mar 2020 11:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387020 The tribunal held that the time frame prescribed in Regulation 20(5) of CBLR, 2013 is directory, not mandatory, and non-compliance did not vitiate the action against the appellant. The tribunal found the appellant guilty of hatching a conspiracy for the clandestine removal of warehoused goods without paying customs duty, committing forgery, misrepresentation, fraud, and forgery. The order confirming violations of regulations led to the cancellation of the appellant's license, forfeiture of the security deposit, and imposition of a penalty, with the appeal being dismissed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 01 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387020