https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772259 CESTAT New Delhi set aside the Principal Commissioner's order dated 09.03.2022 in entirety. The tribunal held that customs authorities lacked jurisdiction to invoke section 28AAA of the Customs Act without DGFT initiating or completing cancellation proceedings of the export license. Following Delhi HC precedent in Amit Exports case, customs cannot deprive instrument holders of benefits absent DGFT's adjudication of invalidity. Penalties under sections 114AA and 114(iii) were set aside as they relied on inadmissible statements under section 108. Confiscation under section 113 was also quashed. Appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Jun 2025 08:30:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772259 CESTAT New Delhi set aside the Principal Commissioner's order dated 09.03.2022 in entirety. The tribunal held that customs authorities lacked jurisdiction to invoke section 28AAA of the Customs Act without DGFT initiating or completing cancellation proceedings of the export license. Following Delhi HC precedent in Amit Exports case, customs cannot deprive instrument holders of benefits absent DGFT's adjudication of invalidity. Penalties under sections 114AA and 114(iii) were set aside as they relied on inadmissible statements under section 108. Confiscation under section 113 was also quashed. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772259