<?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>2025 (3) TMI 442 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767056</link>
    <description>CESTAT New Delhi held that customs broker licence revocation was unjustified. The tribunal ruled that Regulation 10(n) of CBLR 2018 does not require customs brokers to verify correctness of government-issued documents, only their authenticity through online verification or document comparison. Brokers cannot sit in judgment over valid certificates issued by government officers. The presumption under Evidence Act Section 79 is that officer-issued certificates are genuine. Brokers are not obligated to maintain continuous surveillance of client operations or verify ongoing compliance with registered addresses. The appeal was allowed, penalties set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2025 08:42:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=805258" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 442 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767056</link>
      <description>CESTAT New Delhi held that customs broker licence revocation was unjustified. The tribunal ruled that Regulation 10(n) of CBLR 2018 does not require customs brokers to verify correctness of government-issued documents, only their authenticity through online verification or document comparison. Brokers cannot sit in judgment over valid certificates issued by government officers. The presumption under Evidence Act Section 79 is that officer-issued certificates are genuine. Brokers are not obligated to maintain continuous surveillance of client operations or verify ongoing compliance with registered addresses. The appeal was allowed, penalties set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767056</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>