Misuse of Customs House Agent licence by unauthorised users justified revocation and forfeiture of security deposit.

Evidence recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act and the inquiry materials showed that a Customs House Agent licence had been allowed to be used by unauthorised persons for monetary consideration, with signed shipping bills and related facilities supplied to them. That conduct was treated as an impermissible transfer and misuse of the licence by sub-agents who were not licensed CHAs, breaching the licensing regulations. On that basis, the disciplinary findings were held sufficient to support revocation of the CHA licence and forfeiture of the security deposit, and the challenge to the action failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revocation of the Customs House Agent licence and forfeiture of the security deposit were justified on the finding that the licence had been allowed to be used by unauthorised persons in breach of the licensing regulations.

Analysis: The statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, together with the inquiry evidence, established that the licence holder had permitted third parties to use the CHA licence for monetary consideration and had supplied signed shipping bills and related facilities to them. The evidence showed that the licence was effectively being used by sub-agents who were not licensed CHAs, which amounted to an impermissible transfer or misuse of the licence. In those circumstances, the requirements of the relevant licensing regulations stood breached, and the findings in the inquiry report were sufficient to sustain disciplinary action.

Conclusion: The revocation of the CHA licence and forfeiture of the security deposit were upheld, and the challenge by the appellant failed.

Final Conclusion: The disciplinary action taken for misuse and impermissible transfer of the CHA licence was sustained in full.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the evidence shows that a Customs House Agent has allowed unauthorised persons to use the licence for consideration, the conduct constitutes a breach of the licensing regulations and justifies revocation and ancillary penal consequences.

---