<?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 (11) TMI 1649 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782181</link>
    <description>Revocation of a customs broker licence under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 cannot survive where the offence reports no longer support the foundational allegation that Let Export Orders were issued before the goods were carted. The disciplinary action was based on show cause notices alleging collusion among the broker, exporters and customs officers to secure higher drawback, but the charge against the officers who issued the Let Export Orders had been dropped in the underlying proceedings. Once that core allegation was removed, the basis for revocation and forfeiture of the security deposit ceased to exist, and both actions were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2025 08:43:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=867233" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1649 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782181</link>
      <description>Revocation of a customs broker licence under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 cannot survive where the offence reports no longer support the foundational allegation that Let Export Orders were issued before the goods were carted. The disciplinary action was based on show cause notices alleging collusion among the broker, exporters and customs officers to secure higher drawback, but the charge against the officers who issued the Let Export Orders had been dropped in the underlying proceedings. Once that core allegation was removed, the basis for revocation and forfeiture of the security deposit ceased to exist, and both actions were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782181</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>