<?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 (8) TMI 410 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756706</link>
    <description>CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal against revocation of customs broker licence, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty under Customs Broker Licencing Regulations, 2018. The tribunal found charges of breach of obligations under regulation 10 unsubstantiated. Allegations that the broker failed to advise client compliance and colluded in overvalued exports were deemed vague and unfounded. The authority&#039;s conclusion lacked factual basis, and claims regarding withholding information and record preservation were not properly established in the notice or inquiry report. No evidence showed goods weren&#039;t exported or manufactured from duty-paid inputs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Aug 2024 09:09:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763343" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 410 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756706</link>
      <description>CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal against revocation of customs broker licence, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty under Customs Broker Licencing Regulations, 2018. The tribunal found charges of breach of obligations under regulation 10 unsubstantiated. Allegations that the broker failed to advise client compliance and colluded in overvalued exports were deemed vague and unfounded. The authority&#039;s conclusion lacked factual basis, and claims regarding withholding information and record preservation were not properly established in the notice or inquiry report. No evidence showed goods weren&#039;t exported or manufactured from duty-paid inputs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756706</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>