CHA licence suspension unjustified where employee acted independently for another CHA, with no basis to fasten liability on employer

Suspension of a CHA licence under Regulation 21(2) was held unwarranted where the alleged wrongful act was committed by an employee acting independently for another CHA. The employee, though on the appellant's rolls, had dealt with the importer in his own capacity and filed the Bill of Entry on behalf of another CHA. In the absence of material showing that the act was done for and on behalf of the appellant CHA, liability could not be fastened on the appellant and the suspension power was not properly invoked. The suspension order was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suspension of the CHA licence under Regulation 21(2) of the Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 was justified when the alleged wrongful act was committed by an employee acting in an independent capacity for another CHA.

Analysis: The employee concerned, though on the appellant's rolls, had dealt with the importer in his own independent capacity and had filed the Bill of Entry on behalf of another CHA. On those facts, the appellant could not be fastened with liability for the employee's alleged illegal act. In the absence of material showing that the act was committed for and on behalf of the appellant CHA, invocation of the suspension power under Regulation 21(2) was not warranted.

Conclusion: The suspension order was not justified and was set aside; the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the appellant.

---