https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770506 A communication rejecting a special warehouse licence was treated as a final statutory decision and, therefore, was appealable before the Tribunal. The absence of a separate departmental appeal did not bar appellate scrutiny. On merits, Regulation 3(2)(c) of the Special Warehousing Licensing Regulations, 2016 was construed to mean that disqualification applies where the applicant has been penalized for an offence under the Customs Act, 1962. A penalty under Section 112(a) was treated as a civil consequence for contravention, not as proof of penalization for an offence. The licence rejection based solely on that prior penalty was therefore unsustainable and liable to be set aside. en-us Fri, 09 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 May 2025 13:47:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770506 A communication rejecting a special warehouse licence was treated as a final statutory decision and, therefore, was appealable before the Tribunal. The absence of a separate departmental appeal did not bar appellate scrutiny. On merits, Regulation 3(2)(c) of the Special Warehousing Licensing Regulations, 2016 was construed to mean that disqualification applies where the applicant has been penalized for an offence under the Customs Act, 1962. A penalty under Section 112(a) was treated as a civil consequence for contravention, not as proof of penalization for an offence. The licence rejection based solely on that prior penalty was therefore unsustainable and liable to be set aside. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 09 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770506