https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425643 The court upheld the revocation of the respondent's license under Regulation 17(9) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation 2013, emphasizing the respondent's failure to fulfill obligations and verify compliance with customs regulations. The payment of the duty amount by the respondent was deemed an acknowledgment of liability, supporting the conclusion that the respondent acted as the de facto importer. The court found the director's statements binding on the respondent company, rejecting the doctrine of proportionality invoked by the tribunal and concluding that the revocation of the license was justified. The appeal filed by the revenue was allowed, overturning the tribunal's decision. en-us Thu, 21 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Jul 2022 09:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425643 The court upheld the revocation of the respondent's license under Regulation 17(9) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation 2013, emphasizing the respondent's failure to fulfill obligations and verify compliance with customs regulations. The payment of the duty amount by the respondent was deemed an acknowledgment of liability, supporting the conclusion that the respondent acted as the de facto importer. The court found the director's statements binding on the respondent company, rejecting the doctrine of proportionality invoked by the tribunal and concluding that the revocation of the license was justified. The appeal filed by the revenue was allowed, overturning the tribunal's decision. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 21 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425643