https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345039 The Tribunal upheld the forfeiture of a security deposit imposed on a customs house agent for facilitating the clearance of illegally imported goods. It deemed the penalty justified as the employees' involvement was proven. Regarding the failure to revoke the agent's license, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, citing the delay in proceedings. It reiterated that the Committee of Chief Commissioners lacks authority to review orders under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations. The Tribunal emphasized the exclusivity of the Commissioner of Customs' power to terminate licenses, dismissing appeals and underscoring adherence to the specific regulatory framework. en-us Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Feb 2018 11:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345039 The Tribunal upheld the forfeiture of a security deposit imposed on a customs house agent for facilitating the clearance of illegally imported goods. It deemed the penalty justified as the employees' involvement was proven. Regarding the failure to revoke the agent's license, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, citing the delay in proceedings. It reiterated that the Committee of Chief Commissioners lacks authority to review orders under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations. The Tribunal emphasized the exclusivity of the Commissioner of Customs' power to terminate licenses, dismissing appeals and underscoring adherence to the specific regulatory framework. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 12 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345039