https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100640 Admissions by the customs house agent and the unauthorised person established that bills of entry were handled by an unlicensed person under a profit-sharing arrangement, and the later explanation that papers were only left temporarily was rejected as an afterthought. The inquiry report supported the charge, and the show cause notice validly covered revocation of licence and forfeiture of security deposit. On proved misconduct, Regulation 21 of the CHALR, 1984 authorised forfeiture of part of the security deposit, so the penalty was upheld and the appeal failed. en-us Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Feb 2012 16:46:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100640 Admissions by the customs house agent and the unauthorised person established that bills of entry were handled by an unlicensed person under a profit-sharing arrangement, and the later explanation that papers were only left temporarily was rejected as an afterthought. The inquiry report supported the charge, and the show cause notice validly covered revocation of licence and forfeiture of security deposit. On proved misconduct, Regulation 21 of the CHALR, 1984 authorised forfeiture of part of the security deposit, so the penalty was upheld and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 11 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100640