<?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>2007 (3) TMI 424 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121010</link>
    <description>Suspension of a Customs House Agent licence pending enquiry was held unsustainable where the record showed no specific evidence that the CHA knew of, or participated in, employees&#039; alleged collection of illegal gratification. The material only indicated payments linked to fine and penalty and recovery of documents from employees, but did not establish that the firm was aware that its staff were taking bribes in the name of customs officials for assessment and clearance of cargo. In the absence of proof of the CHA&#039;s involvement, the principle that a CHA firm is not vicariously liable for an employee&#039;s bribery conduct applied, and the suspension order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jul 2012 10:27:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158004" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (3) TMI 424 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121010</link>
      <description>Suspension of a Customs House Agent licence pending enquiry was held unsustainable where the record showed no specific evidence that the CHA knew of, or participated in, employees&#039; alleged collection of illegal gratification. The material only indicated payments linked to fine and penalty and recovery of documents from employees, but did not establish that the firm was aware that its staff were taking bribes in the name of customs officials for assessment and clearance of cargo. In the absence of proof of the CHA&#039;s involvement, the principle that a CHA firm is not vicariously liable for an employee&#039;s bribery conduct applied, and the suspension order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121010</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>