<?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>2006 (4) TMI 285 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118005</link>
    <description>A Custom House Agent cannot be penalised or subjected to forfeiture under the CHA Licensing Regulations unless the record affirmatively shows that it, or an authorised employee acting for it, actually transacted the customs business or unlawfully transferred its licence. Here, the evidence did not establish that the appellant filed the shipping bills, handled the cargo, or authorised any person to act in its name; the consignments were presented by an unauthorised third party. The statements relied on did not satisfactorily connect the appellant with the clearance of the goods, so the alleged contraventions were not proved and the punishment was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:49:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155002" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (4) TMI 285 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118005</link>
      <description>A Custom House Agent cannot be penalised or subjected to forfeiture under the CHA Licensing Regulations unless the record affirmatively shows that it, or an authorised employee acting for it, actually transacted the customs business or unlawfully transferred its licence. Here, the evidence did not establish that the appellant filed the shipping bills, handled the cargo, or authorised any person to act in its name; the consignments were presented by an unauthorised third party. The statements relied on did not satisfactorily connect the appellant with the clearance of the goods, so the alleged contraventions were not proved and the punishment was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118005</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>