https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198498 The appellate tribunal set aside the Commissioner of Customs' decision to forfeit a security deposit of Rs. 75,000 by a Customs House Agent (CHA) for discrepancies in a shipping bill, emphasizing that penalizing the CHA for a regulation not in effect during the relevant period was unwarranted. The tribunal highlighted the importance of due diligence but clarified that the lack of a specific regulation at the time of the incident could not be a basis for forfeiture. en-us Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Feb 2018 09:01:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198498 The appellate tribunal set aside the Commissioner of Customs' decision to forfeit a security deposit of Rs. 75,000 by a Customs House Agent (CHA) for discrepancies in a shipping bill, emphasizing that penalizing the CHA for a regulation not in effect during the relevant period was unwarranted. The tribunal highlighted the importance of due diligence but clarified that the lack of a specific regulation at the time of the incident could not be a basis for forfeiture. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 03 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198498