https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250823 A Custom House Agent licence revocation was upheld on merits because the licence holder remained responsible for unauthorised acts and omissions committed by its employees under the licensing regulations, even if the partners lacked direct knowledge. However, the Tribunal exercised discretion to give the revocation prospective effect, noting that the licence holder had already suffered suspension and loss of business for about two years. The order was therefore maintained only up to the specified date, after which restoration of the licence was directed. The appeal was thus partly allowed on the basis of prospective operation and leniency. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250823 A Custom House Agent licence revocation was upheld on merits because the licence holder remained responsible for unauthorised acts and omissions committed by its employees under the licensing regulations, even if the partners lacked direct knowledge. However, the Tribunal exercised discretion to give the revocation prospective effect, noting that the licence holder had already suffered suspension and loss of business for about two years. The order was therefore maintained only up to the specified date, after which restoration of the licence was directed. The appeal was thus partly allowed on the basis of prospective operation and leniency. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 24 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250823