<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (10) TMI 473 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349318</link>
    <description>A customs broker is answerable for the acts and omissions of its authorised employees, and liability follows where an employee files export documents in fraudulent transactions without proper authorisation or verification of the exporter&#039;s credentials. On the record, the G-card holder and authorised signatory admitted filing the shipping bills for consideration, and the materials showed that the broker failed to verify the transaction or the exporter&#039;s authenticity. The regulatory contraventions were treated as established, so the licence revocation and forfeiture of the security deposit were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2017 06:12:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=492176" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 473 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349318</link>
      <description>A customs broker is answerable for the acts and omissions of its authorised employees, and liability follows where an employee files export documents in fraudulent transactions without proper authorisation or verification of the exporter&#039;s credentials. On the record, the G-card holder and authorised signatory admitted filing the shipping bills for consideration, and the materials showed that the broker failed to verify the transaction or the exporter&#039;s authenticity. The regulatory contraventions were treated as established, so the licence revocation and forfeiture of the security deposit were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349318</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>