https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262226 The court set aside the revocation of the appellant's Custom House Agents License as disproportionate to the breach committed but upheld the forfeiture of the security deposit due to the lack of supervision over the employee. The court emphasized the employer's vicarious liability for the actions of their employees and considered the proportionality of penalties in such cases. The appeal was disposed of with a balance between penalty imposition and the principle of proportionality. en-us Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Aug 2015 06:33:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262226 The court set aside the revocation of the appellant's Custom House Agents License as disproportionate to the breach committed but upheld the forfeiture of the security deposit due to the lack of supervision over the employee. The court emphasized the employer's vicarious liability for the actions of their employees and considered the proportionality of penalties in such cases. The appeal was disposed of with a balance between penalty imposition and the principle of proportionality. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262226