Customs House Agent supervision obligations upheld as responsibility for employee conduct justified prohibition at the customs station.

Customs house agents must maintain supervision over employees and remain responsible for acts or omissions committed in the course of business under the Licensing Regulations. On the facts found, the agent could not disclaim responsibility for the conduct of the person acting for the exporter, so the prohibition from functioning at the concerned customs station was upheld. An earlier order was held inapplicable because it addressed delay in suspension and compliance with Board norms, not the agent's culpability.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant customs house agent had failed to comply with the supervisory obligations under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 so as to justify prohibition from functioning at the concerned customs station.

Analysis: The statutory scheme required the customs house agent to exercise necessary supervision over its employees and to be responsible for their acts or omissions in the course of business. On the facts found, the appellant could not disclaim responsibility for the conduct of the person acting for the exporter. The reliance placed on an earlier order was held inapplicable because that order dealt with delay in suspension and compliance with Board norms, and did not decide the agent's culpability.

Conclusion: The prohibition was upheld and the appellant's challenge failed.

---