https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326506 Extreme disciplinary action against a Customs House Agent requires cogent evidence of deliberate misconduct or connivance, not merely alleged lapses in KYC compliance or inadequate advice to the importer. The record showed that the agent had obtained and verified the documents furnished, filed the bill of entry on that basis, and that the enquiry and adjudication findings were internally inconsistent on the alleged breach. In the absence of proof of active complicity or a serious violation justifying revocation, the revocation of the CHA licence and forfeiture of the security deposit were set aside. en-us Wed, 16 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Nov 2016 11:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326506 Extreme disciplinary action against a Customs House Agent requires cogent evidence of deliberate misconduct or connivance, not merely alleged lapses in KYC compliance or inadequate advice to the importer. The record showed that the agent had obtained and verified the documents furnished, filed the bill of entry on that basis, and that the enquiry and adjudication findings were internally inconsistent on the alleged breach. In the absence of proof of active complicity or a serious violation justifying revocation, the revocation of the CHA licence and forfeiture of the security deposit were set aside. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 16 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326506