https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270833 Untested statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act could not, by themselves, sustain disciplinary charges where the makers were not examined and no cross-examination was allowed. In the absence of corroborative material showing sale, transfer or lending of the CHA licence, the alleged misconduct was not proved. On the established facts, only a limited lapse in obtaining authorisations was made out, which did not justify the extreme penalty of revocation. The security-deposit forfeiture also required moderation and could not stand at the full level originally imposed. en-us Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jan 2016 05:53:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270833 Untested statements recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act could not, by themselves, sustain disciplinary charges where the makers were not examined and no cross-examination was allowed. In the absence of corroborative material showing sale, transfer or lending of the CHA licence, the alleged misconduct was not proved. On the established facts, only a limited lapse in obtaining authorisations was made out, which did not justify the extreme penalty of revocation. The security-deposit forfeiture also required moderation and could not stand at the full level originally imposed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 07 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270833