<?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>2024 (7) TMI 1174 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755954</link>
    <description>Suspension of a Customs Broker&#039;s licence under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 was treated as an interim regulatory safeguard pending inquiry, not as a penalty, because the penal framework separately provides for monetary sanctions and does not list suspension as punishment. Regulation 10(n) was read as requiring verification of client particulars through reliable, independent and authentic documents, data or information, but not mandatory physical verification in every case; reliance on official records such as IEC and GSTIN was insufficient by itself to establish breach on the reasoning adopted below. The Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside and the broker&#039;s challenge succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2024 07:38:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=761409" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 1174 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755954</link>
      <description>Suspension of a Customs Broker&#039;s licence under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 was treated as an interim regulatory safeguard pending inquiry, not as a penalty, because the penal framework separately provides for monetary sanctions and does not list suspension as punishment. Regulation 10(n) was read as requiring verification of client particulars through reliable, independent and authentic documents, data or information, but not mandatory physical verification in every case; reliance on official records such as IEC and GSTIN was insufficient by itself to establish breach on the reasoning adopted below. The Tribunal&#039;s order was set aside and the broker&#039;s challenge succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755954</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>