<?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>Penalty u/s 114A bars Private Warehouse Licence u/s 58, as Regulation 3(2)(c) disqualification upheld</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95048</link>
    <description>CESTAT upheld the customs authority&#039;s rejection of the appellant&#039;s application for a Private Warehouse Licence under Section 58 of the Customs Act, 1962, interpreting Regulation 3(2)(c) of the PWLR to render ineligible any person on whom penalty under Section 114A has been imposed. The Tribunal held that the appellant&#039;s construction would make Regulation 3(2)(b) or 3(2)(c) redundant, contrary to settled principles of statutory interpretation requiring harmonious construction and effect to every provision. Accepting the Commissioner&#039;s reasoning that conviction-based disqualification falls under Regulation 3(2)(b) and penalty-based disqualification under 3(2)(c), CESTAT dismissed the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2025 08:39:22 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2025 08:39:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=871514" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Penalty u/s 114A bars Private Warehouse Licence u/s 58, as Regulation 3(2)(c) disqualification upheld</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95048</link>
      <description>CESTAT upheld the customs authority&#039;s rejection of the appellant&#039;s application for a Private Warehouse Licence under Section 58 of the Customs Act, 1962, interpreting Regulation 3(2)(c) of the PWLR to render ineligible any person on whom penalty under Section 114A has been imposed. The Tribunal held that the appellant&#039;s construction would make Regulation 3(2)(b) or 3(2)(c) redundant, contrary to settled principles of statutory interpretation requiring harmonious construction and effect to every provision. Accepting the Commissioner&#039;s reasoning that conviction-based disqualification falls under Regulation 3(2)(b) and penalty-based disqualification under 3(2)(c), CESTAT dismissed the appeal.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2025 08:39:22 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=95048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>