<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (11) TMI 486 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445595</link>
    <description>CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal challenging revocation of customs broker license. The tribunal found no violations of CBLR Regulations 10(d), 10(f), and 10(n) regarding mis-declaration of goods value, withholding information, or client verification. The customs broker had declared transaction value as per commercial invoices and obtained proper KYC documents. However, tribunal imposed penalty of Rs.10,000 for failure to act proactively under Regulation 10(a) when receiving documents through intermediary. The tribunal criticized excessive delay in adjudication process spanning five years, noting prescribed 90-day timelines were not followed. The broker&#039;s prolonged business suspension was deemed sufficient punishment for any contraventions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2023 11:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=731916" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 486 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445595</link>
      <description>CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal challenging revocation of customs broker license. The tribunal found no violations of CBLR Regulations 10(d), 10(f), and 10(n) regarding mis-declaration of goods value, withholding information, or client verification. The customs broker had declared transaction value as per commercial invoices and obtained proper KYC documents. However, tribunal imposed penalty of Rs.10,000 for failure to act proactively under Regulation 10(a) when receiving documents through intermediary. The tribunal criticized excessive delay in adjudication process spanning five years, noting prescribed 90-day timelines were not followed. The broker&#039;s prolonged business suspension was deemed sufficient punishment for any contraventions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445595</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>