https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391616 The appellate tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order due to legal flaws. The tribunal found merit in the argument that the customs broker license had already been revoked previously, rendering the impugned order invalid. Additionally, the forfeiture of the security deposit was deemed invalid as it had already been forfeited in an earlier order. The tribunal emphasized the incorrect application of superseded regulations post-2013, leading to the ruling that the proceedings should have been conducted under the new regulations. en-us Thu, 23 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Feb 2021 16:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391616 The appellate tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order due to legal flaws. The tribunal found merit in the argument that the customs broker license had already been revoked previously, rendering the impugned order invalid. Additionally, the forfeiture of the security deposit was deemed invalid as it had already been forfeited in an earlier order. The tribunal emphasized the incorrect application of superseded regulations post-2013, leading to the ruling that the proceedings should have been conducted under the new regulations. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 23 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391616