https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773405 The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging a penalty imposed under section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 on a customs broker for alleged involvement in illegal diversion of imported goods. The petitioner argued it had disassociated from the importer via a 'no objection' letter before the alleged offence occurred. While the appellate tribunal had set aside the revocation of the petitioner's customs broker licence on grounds of disassociation, the HC held that licence revocation proceedings and penalty proceedings under section 28(4) operate on different parameters. The HC declined to interfere in writ jurisdiction given the availability of statutory appeal under section 129A, granting the petitioner three weeks to file appeal despite the expired limitation period. en-us Thu, 19 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Jun 2025 08:42:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773405 The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging a penalty imposed under section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 on a customs broker for alleged involvement in illegal diversion of imported goods. The petitioner argued it had disassociated from the importer via a 'no objection' letter before the alleged offence occurred. While the appellate tribunal had set aside the revocation of the petitioner's customs broker licence on grounds of disassociation, the HC held that licence revocation proceedings and penalty proceedings under section 28(4) operate on different parameters. The HC declined to interfere in writ jurisdiction given the availability of statutory appeal under section 129A, granting the petitioner three weeks to file appeal despite the expired limitation period. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 19 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773405